/ 

25th Congress, ^ Doc. No. 274. ] Ho. of Reps. 

2d Session. War Dept. 

u 
CONTRACT—GENERAL JESUP, CREEK CHIEFS, &c. 

LETTER 

FROM *^* 4^ ^ 

THE SECRETARY OF WAR, ^^ 



'J 



TRANSMITTING 



tS report from the Commissioner of India)! Affairs, accompanied hy 
copies of a Contract made between General Jesiip, certain Creek 
Chiefs, and J. C. Watson Sf Co. 



March 23, 1838. 
Referred to the Committee on Indian Affairs. 



War Department, March Q2, 1838. 
Sir: In compliance with the lesolution of the House of Rej)re.scntatives 
of Februai'y 19, I iiave the honor to tiansmit a report from the Commis- 
sioner of Indian Affairs, accompanied by copies of a contract made be- 
tween General Jesiij), certain Creek chiefs, and J. C. Watson & Co., and 
papers connected therevvitli. 

Very respectfully, your most obedient servant, 

J. R. POINSETT. 
Hon. James K. Polk, 

Speaker of the House of Representatives. 



War Department, 

Office Indian Affairs, March 21, 1838. 
Sir : In obedience to your direction, I have the honor to submit copies 
of a contract made between General Jesup, certain Creek chiefs, and 
James C. Watson & Co., and of the other papers called for by the resolu- 
tion of the House of Representatives of February 19. The assent of the 
Indians to this contract was taken by Cai)tain Page, and the form of the 
assent is in every instatice the same. A copy of one only is given, there- 
fore ; but this is accompanied by a list, showing the names of all the In- 
dians whose lands have been conveyed by the contract, and describing the 
reserve of each. This list corresponds with the register of Colonel flo- 
gan, referred to in the contract, and making the basis of it ; atid it is con- 
sidered unnccessai*y, therefore, to furnish a copy of the latter. It is j)ro- 
per to observe, that the contract made between some chiefs of the tribe, 
Tbomas Allen, print. 



2 [ Doc. No. 274. ] - ^ / . . 

and Messrs. C J. M< Donald N: Cd., on the 7tli ol October, 1 837, of which 
a coj)} is furnished, was placed upon the files at the time of its reception, 
withtjut being foniially considered by the Depaitnient, many circ iiinstan- 
ces Cfimbining to render its recognition inexpedient ; and this course was 
adopted with the c<»nsent of the represewtative of the persons claiming un- 
der it. 

A cry respectfully, your most obedient servant, 

C. A. HARRIS, 
, C 071X711 issi oner. 

Hon. J. R. POINS iTT, 

Secretary of Jf^ar. 

p. S. It is proper to remark, that no action has taken place in this de- 
partment on the assents taken by Captain Page, above referred to : they 
having been received but a short time since, and the limited force of Miis 
oflice having hitherto prevented their examination. Of course, therefore, 
it cannot now be sai«l that they are or aie not in confoi-rtiity to the require- 
ments of the President's conditional confirmation of the contract. 

C. A. H. 



HeADQ.! AUTERS, ArMY OF THE SoUTH, 

Tallassee, Alabama, Jlugust 30, 1836. 

Sir: The embarrassments in the way of Iinlian emigration were, until 
recently, so formidable, that I began to apiirehend the measure would 
entirely fail. Suits wei-e multiplied against the Indians; their negroes, 
horses, and other property taken; themselves driven almost to des|)eration 
the ditllculties which surrounded them, the greatest dissatisfaction pre- 
vailed among them. There seemed to me to be no means of getting tlicm 
out of the country, peaceably, but by enabling them to pay the just demands 
against them, and defending them against those \s hich were doubtful or un- 
just. The ex|)ense of feeding the Indians, added to that of supporting the 
army, which mustnecessaiily be retained in servjcewhilst they remain in the 
countiy, is from seven to ten thousand dollai's a day. The chiefs insisted 
on seveial points, and, among others, they refpiired the settlement of their 
land clainjs, and the payment in advance of their annuity for 1 837. Sound 
policy, as well as economy, seemed to require that their demands, to a cer- 
tain extent, should receive a favorable decision. I accordingly a|)|)oinied 
Colonel John A. Campbell, of Montgomery, a lawyer of high standing, 
and a member of the Legislature of Alabama, to treat with then) in relation 
to the advance of their annuity ; and. having been |)ermitted by the Presi- 
dent to raise, if possible, an Indian Once for service in Florida, I directed 
that the furnishing of that force should be made one of the cotnlitions. I 
enclose a coi)y of the arrangement entered into. The wairiors required 
arc to be raised; the annuity to be advanced ; and, in addition, where the 
services of the warriors in Floiida shall have terminate<l, the chiefs are to 
receive ten tliousand dollars as a subsidy or Imunty. And to prevent delay 
in the movement westward, IIopo«'tl:le Yoholu, the ),iin( ipal chief, is to 
receive, for his inlluence and exertions in putting the Indians in motion to 
the West, two thousand dollars: about one fourth of the expense to the 



[ Doc. No. 274. 3 3 

country of one day's delay. I employed Colonel Campbell, also, to 
examine the claims against the Indians, and to defend the suits in the cases 
which he should think ought not to be paid. 

A proposition was made to the Indian chiefs by acompany to purchase the 
riglits of the Indians to all the stolen or disputed lands within what is called 
Doctor McHenry's district, except the Upper Thioblocco and two or three 
other towns. Seventy-five thousand dollars was offered for the rights ; the 
company to taketlie placeof the Indians. Ifeltmuch doubt as to the propriety 
of such an arrangement, as well as the power of entering into it; consider- 
ing, as I did, that each individual Indian had a vested right in his particu- 
lar location. The chiefs, however, insisted on a settlement previous to 
removal, and informed me that their people had been so often deceived 
that they had no faith in promises, and believed, if thry should leave the 
country without a settlement of theii- claims, they would receive notliing 
for them. I consented that they might, if they should think proper, dispose 
of their unadjusted interest; and I ap|)ointed Colonel Campbell to conduct 
the negotiation on the part of the United States, and to prepare the con- 
tract for the signature of the pai'ties. 

The chiefs having consulted, as far as circumstances permitted, their 
people, and conferred among themselves, accepted the terms offered, and 
one-half the sum offered has already been paid. I have ratified the con- 
tract, subject to the approval of the President ; and I herewith enclose a 
copy of it. Nothing j«hort of the absolute necessity of satisfying the Indi- 
ans, and removing from their minds the impression that they would receive 
nothing for their lands, would have induced me, under any circumstances, 
to have sanctioned it; but I am of opinion, and Colonel Campbell concurs 
with me, that no other course could, under the ciicumstances, iiave been 
adopted, promising equal benefit to the Indians. The band of Hopoeihle 
Yoholo are now loading their wagons preparatory to their removal, 
and a few of the warriors for Florida have already come in. 

I have the honor to be, sir, your obedient servant, 

THOS. S. JESUP. 



} 



The State of Alabama, 

Tallapoosa county. 

This indenture, made and concluded at the town of Tallassce, in the 
county and State aforesaid, on the 28th day of August, A. D. 1836, between 
the United States of America, of the first part; and Opothe Yoholo, Mad 
Blue, Tuckabatche Micco, Little Doctor, and Jim Boy, chiefs of the Creek 
tribe of Indians, and James C. Watson, Edward Hanrick, William 
Walker and Company, Peter C. Harris, and John Peabody, of the third 
part, witnesseth : 

That whereas, by a treaty between the United States of America and 
the Creek tiibe of Indians, ratified in the year of our Lord 1 832, each head 
of a fan)ily belonging to said tribe became entitled to one-half a section of 
land, which was subsequently allotted according to tiie same : and where- 
as, by the same treaty, it was provided that no sale slinuld be valid unless 
the contract should meet with the approbation of an agent of tlie United 
States, and confirmation by the President thereof: and whereas the par- 
ties of the second part allege, on behalf of individuals of the said tribe, that 



4 [ Doc. No. 274. "j 

frauds liave been ])erpetratcil upon the liolderH of land tinder the said treaty, 
wliereliy tlicir titU's liave birofne itiv«)lved w itii (lillirulty, their riglits jeop- 
ardizt'd, and conrnlence in their security impaired : and wlieiras investi- 
gations liave taken ])lace, without results, and they are about to leave 
the lands redetl, for their homes in the West : 'I'o the end of settling 
all their business in this country, of transferring IVom themselves the 
bu;<leii of liiigation. and of obtaining s(iin«'thing for their claims pro- 
porti«)ned to their \aliie, and at tlie same time to make a provision for the 
fail- and bona fiile purchasers from the peojjjetif their tribe, [tiiey have] ad- 
vise<l their people holding said claims to accede to a general disposition of 
them, and lia\e obtained their consent to remise, release, and forever (piit 
claim, on the pait (»f all and each r>f them, to the parties of the third part, and 
each of them, ol all tlieir right, title, inteiest, ilaim, and demand, to all the 
tracts and parcels of land situate, l> ing, and being in liiat |)art of the teiri- 
tory ceded in the treaty aforesaid, comprised within the district of lands in 
which R. >V. Mcllenry was the certifying agent, whiih has formed the sub- 
ject of contest before tlie agents of the United States, and which ha^e either 
been certified and niai ked for reversal, or which have been sold and certified, 
without authority in the agents of the United States to witness said sales, 
or certify said contiacts, (the same being the cases ci>ntained in the reports 
of the investigating agents:) subject. ho\\e>er, to the restrictions imposed by 
the party of the first |)art, as follows : 

1st. J'hat the title liereby obtained, or whicii may be obtained in pursu- 
ance of this coi»tract, sliall not interfere with tlie i-igiits of any individual 
who has made a prior valid contract with the rightful claimant of said lands, 
(whether the same has been certified or not,) or any part thereof; hut the 
respective claims (if necessary for settlement) shall be investigated by an 
agent appointed by the President of the United States, and the ratification 
of the I'residenl shall be necessary to the perfection of the titles : provided, 
nevertheless, that, for the ascertainment of the faii-ness and validity of any 
claim, as well as for the protection of the j)artles of the third part, they 
shall be entitled to the benefit of the same lules that the Indians would 
have been entitled to, but for this contract, under the instructions of the 
War Department. 

2d. Tliat when any contiact shall be preferred by the said agent, upon 
investigation, the parties of the tiiird part shall be entitled to the same 
security for the consideration as tlie Indian would have had but for this 
contract : jirox iileil, if the amount paid into the hands of the agent of the 
United States shall exceed on any parcel of land the pro-rata xnluiilion 
made in this contract, then one-half of said o\erplus shall be retained by 
the agent for the Indian located upon said reserve, or, if dead, his heirs. 

3d. That the money hereafier stipulated to be paid, shall be jiaid to the 
Indian entitled to the land, in jiresence of the chief and an otHcer of the 
United States ; and, until such payment he made, it shall be dejiosited with 
the certilying agents of the district: the payment <d' whicli shall be a 
consummation of this conliact. 

4tli. That if any one Indian holding any parcel of land therein con- 
veyed, shall lefusc to carry into effect the provisions of this contract, 
in that case a pro riita allowance upon the consideration herein stipulated 
shall be made to the jiarties of the third ])ai-t : |)i-ovided, his consent shall 
he given before the consummation of this contiact. 

5lli. That all those lands w hich have not been sold, including those where 
the Indian has died before sale, shall be taken at a valuation, to be made 



[ Doc. No. 274. ] 5 

by the persons who may be appoitited by the agent of the United States ; 
who shall finally close the arrangements provided for in this contract ami 
the treaty : provided, that this shall not refer to any claims embraced in 
previous articles of this contract : and provided further, that valid letters 
can be obtained therefor. ' i • k 

The parties of the third part agree to receive the conveyance hereinbe- 
fore made, subject to all the conditions and stipulations herein contained, 
and will pay therefor the sum of seventy-five thousand dollars : one-halt to be 
paid upon the sealing of these presents, to the agent of the United States who 
may be appointed to receive the same ; and one-half in four months, at 
Fort Gibson, in the State of Arkansas. , 

In testimony whereof, I, John A. Campbell, appointed by Major Gen- 
eral Thomas S. Jesup, commanding southern army, as agent ef the Uni- 
ted States to execute the same, &c. 

In testimony whereof, we have hereunto set our hands and athxed our 
seals, the day and date above written. 

Opothe Yoholo, his x mark. 

Mad Blue, his x mark. 

Tuckabatche Micco, his x mark. 

Tustenugge Chopco, his x mark. 



Witnesses, 
John Page, 

Cajit. Supt. Creeks. 
J. Y. Lane, 

Capt. V. S. ^rmy. 



Little Doctor, 
Jim Boy, 
J. C. Watson. 
Edward Hanrick. 
Wm. Walker. 
Peter C Harris. 
John Peabody. 



his x mark, 
his X mark. 



Sanctioned by me, subject to the ratification of the President of the United 

States, August 28, 1836, ^^oxtt, 

^ THOS. S. JESUP, 

Maj. Gen., commanding Jirmy of the South. 

This contract shall apply to the towns only of Coosawda's, Tuckabatche's, 
Aufula's, Chat-tof-sof-kin's, Koiiomatska's, Catchka's,Luchipo.ga's, Sou- 
gahatchee, Tallassee, Tuskegee, Chehawtown on Eufula creek, Thlob- 
thlocko or Jim Boy's town, Clewella, Talmachussee, Tawwassa, Ottasa, 
Autauga. The chiefs before stated declaring that they have no advice or 
consent from the other towns. 
August 28, 1836. 



Tuskegee, Alabama, 

September 12, 1836. 

Sir: The recent proceedings of the Indian chiefs, or a portion of them, 
at Tallassee, by which a paper called a treaty has been made with certain 
white men, viz: Watson, Walker, Hanrick, Peabody and Harris, and, as 
it is understood by me, with the assent and approbation of General Jesup, 



6 [ Doc. No. 274. ] 

of the United States army, lias caused, very naturally, great excitement 
and dissatisfaction amongst iliose citizens of this and other States, who, 
relying upon the faith ot ihe Government, had hought and paid for lauds 
8ii|iposed to have been, beyond doubt, good propeity as to title : having 
been purchased fioni tiie common Indians, \vhose right alone it was to 
pass away or alienate their property in them. 

1 have denoniinated this pajier ♦♦called a treaty;" for it would be a 
misnomei- to call that a treaty which was negotiated uj)on the spur of the 
occasion, with a few chiefs and a set of speculators, and consummated at 
the hour of midnight, or an hour or two thereafter-, by which six hundred 
and fifty tico hall sections of Alabama lands were transferred by one dash 
of tlie pen, from probably as many owners to some half dozen speculators, 
for a jjotoriously trifling consideiation ; and that, in fact, not by the owners, 
but by a fere chiefs assuming the pierogatixe of selling the title to land- 
ed ])roperty of several hundred of the covimon people of their tribes, 
without thfir ajiprobation. and, lor aught that is known tt) the contrary, 
against tht ir desire. Irr fact, it has come within my own observation, that 
the commorr Indians are greatly incerrsed against the chiefs in consequence 
of the sale of these lands, denying their- right to have done so ; and, in one 
instance, the life of the chief was threatened, if not menaced, in conse- 
quence of the proceeding. 

It is deemed unnecessai-y, sir, to dwell, in a communication of this char- 
acter, upon the anomalous ftatures of this paper purporting to be a 
♦♦treaty." It is obviorrs that the high contracting party on one side, who 
paid down the half of £75.000, must have had some guaranty tirat the 
amount would not be lost to them ; arrd if nothing more was designed by 
the paper than merely to operate as a doucerrr to the Indians to emigrate 
quietly and |)eaceably, then it carr be justified upon the liighest principles 
of public policy and justice. But if, on the contr-ary, this paj)cr-, which is 
now doubtless in the power of the Department, shall be received by tlie 
Government, arrd approved and acted on as a ♦• treaty," binding on all, 
and, in the language of the constitution, the sripreme lawof the land, then 
Mill the case assume arr entirely diflVreut aspect ; and it will again open 
to the already gaping jaws of political agitation food and errcouragement 
for years, which may produce, by possibility, the most unfiietidly state of 
things between the State and Federal Go\er-rrments. For- it is not to be 
supposed, tor a moment, that our- State courts will sit(|uietly on their seats, 
and \\itness the glaring individual injus'ice whrch a ratification of this 
midnight treaty by the Go\ernment will pr-oduce. 

It would avail nre nothing to disguise the fact that I am interested in 
defeating the corrsummation of this miscalled treaty. There is, however, 
motive enough, independent of this, which pr-ompts mc to solicit your 
perusal of this sheet. The public voice may be still at present ; birt the time 
has t(» come, and that ere long, wlien it will be hear-(l in thurrder- against 
the authors of the wide-spread scene of violation of j)r'oper-ty and sacrifice 
of human lile whiih their- unhallowed proceedings have occasioned. I 
forbear to dwell u{)on this to|)ic ; the moral character of the nation, as 
well as of this immediate commuirity, is concerned, in dragging before 
tlie world tlie instigators of the late outrages on the Creek nation ; and, 
reposirrg still with some confit^ence in the wisdom and purity of the Gov 
ernmerrt, I will not permit myself to doubt birt that the guilty instiga- 
tors of these bloody scenes will be brturght to justice, and the sanctity of 



[ Doc. No. 274. ] 7 

private riglit and property secured against the corruptions of a heartless 
and unprincipled band, seentjingly resolved to monopolize all the wealth, 
and, through that, to control the very administration of the Government. 
It remains for me, in conclusion, to offer to the consideration of the 
Department the following facts, and to solicit its deliberate action upon 
them. 

Within the compass of the last twelve months, myself and another gen- 
tleman have made purchases, in a fair and open manner, and, as we believe, 
in the manner contemplated by the Government, of certain half sections 
and sections of land from the Indians actually located upon the lands, for 
which they have received valuable consideration, and for which we hold 
the regularly executed deeds of the individual Indians who owned it, attest- 
ed by the judge of the county courts and other respectable witnesses. 
Previously, however, to our obtaining these evidences of title, we applied to 
the certifying agent, with the Indians present who owned the lands, who 
refused to certify them, upon the plea " that his instructions did not 
contemplate the certification of any lands that had been under disputed 
claims." But you will observe, sir, that these lands identified below were 
a part of those, the transfer of which had been reversed by the investigating 
agent of the Government on the ground of fraud ; and we very naturally 
supposed that our purchases of tlie real owners of the land, and in the 
presence of the agent, would have been duly certified, and thus secured to 
us the property in the lands. I would remark, at the same time, that the 
character of the certifying agent forbids the idea that, in the refusal to 
certify, he was actuated by any other than an honest conviction of the pro- 
priety of his decision. 

The provisions of tlie recent " treaty," (so called,) are yet, to myself and 
others, a profound secret between the contracting parties ; all that we 
have learned of those provisions is from report, which is not often an 
infallible guide of action. 

I hope sincerely that those provisions may have been misrepresented, 
and that the agents of the Government may not have at *' one fell swoop" 
consummated the mischief which will ensue if it should turn out that the 
reports are but too true. In order to place the Department in possession 
of the evidences of our titles to the lands described below, I shall embrace 
some early future moment to forward a copy of all the deeds to the lands, 
accompanied with alfidavits of respectable citizens of the identity of the 
Indians conveying the lands, and that th^y were entitled to the lands so 
conveyed in the deeds, and tliat they were located on them, that we paid 
the money, and accompanied the Indians to the office of the certifying 
agent, who declined to certify ; and, also, (if to be obtained,) an explanation 
of the agent, containing his reasons for refusing to certify. All these 
documents will be forwarded at the earliest practicable moment. 

In the mean time, the object oj this communication, in advance of the doc- 
uments here advised of to be forwarded, is to apprize the Department of 
my intention to contest every inch of ground in maintaining my right to 
the property in these lands, against the pretensions of the land company; 
and firmly but respectfully to protest against the issuing of patents to any one 
of the half sections or sections described below, to the company with whom 
he Indian chiefs and GeneralJesup treated, or to any other person or per- 
sons ; sin(\ I do hereby protest, before the judge of the circuit court now 



8 [ Doc. No. 274. J 

sitting at Montgomery, in the State of Alabama, against the issuing of 
patents to the lullowiiig sections <»(' land lying within the limits of the 
State of Alabama and tlie Creek nation, viz : 

In the Tuckabatche town. 
Section 15, township 13, range 24. 
♦* 12, *' 13, *' 24. 

North half of section 13, township 13, range 24. 



«< 




28, 




14, 




24. 


West half 




34, 




14, 




24. 


Morthhalf 




16, 




14, 




24. 


» t 




21, 




14, 




24. 


South half 




9, 




14, 




24. 


t< 




6, 




13, 




25. 


North half 




22, 




18, 




25. 


East ♦• 




14, 




13. 




24. 


North •< 




11, 




13, 




24. 


South ♦< 




30, 




13, 




£5. 



In the Tallmachusse town. 

South half of section 19, township 14, range 28. 

North •« « 30, " 14, ** 24. 

•♦ " « 35, " 17, '' 21. 

In the Clewella town. 
East half of section 31, township 17, range 22. 

The property on all the above-described half sections and sections I here- 
by claim as legal and erpiitable owner, and the patents to which I claim as 
due to me from the Govci'nment, ami deny to the Government the right of 
issuing them to any other person or peisons whomsoever. 

Should the pi'otest not be addressed to the proper Department, the un- 
dei'signed would feel obliged if the Depaitment to which it should have 
been addressed might be furnished with it, and that it might be placed on 
thejiles of the Jiepartinent, and common or special record, for evidence 
hereafter, should it be ajjplicable in any suit in law or equity in the State 
or Federal courts. 

In addition to the above protest, I hereby claim of the Department the 
patents for the half sections and sections previously described, so soon as 
I shall have fuinished it with the evidences of title promised. 

All of which is most respectfully submitted by, sir, vour obedient ser- 
vant, JULIKN S. DEVEREUX. 

To the Hon. Lewis Cass, 

Secretary of the War Department, TVashington. 

State of Alabama, ") 

Montgomery county. J 

I, Eli Shortridge, presiding as judge of the circuit court for the county 
aforesaid, do hereby certify that Colonel Julien S. Devereux did sign the 
above pretest before me, on this day, and lecjuest of me to certify the same. 
Given under my hand this 15th September, 1836. 

E. SHORTRIDGE. 



[ Doc. No. 274, ] 9 

Montgomery, September 15, 1836. 
Sir : I do hereby protest, before the judge of tlie circuit court now sit- 
ting at Montgomery, in the State of Alabama, against the issuing of patents 
to the half section of land described below, in the same manner, and from 
and for the same reasons, as are contained in tlie foregoing protest ; said 
land lying within the limits of the State of Alabama and the Creek nation. 

In the Tuckabatche toivn. 
South half of section 13, township 13, range 24. 

BIRD FITZPATRICK. 

To the Hon. Lewis Cass, 

Secretary of the War Department, Washington. 



State of Alabama 

Montgomery county 



- •■} 

I, Eli Shortridge, circuit judge, presiding in the county aforesaid, do 
hereby certify that Bird Fitzpatrick did sign, in my presence, the above 
protest, and reijuested of me to attest the same, which is hereby done. 

Given under my hand this 15th day of September, 1836. 

E. SHORTRIDGE. 



Columbus, Georgia, 

September 16, 1836. 
Dear Sir: The newspapers inform us that a contract was recently 
concluded betwixt a large company of speculators and certain Indian 
chiefs, by which the stolen lands of the Creeks (as they are called) have 
been sold and purchased. It is presumed that, if the President approves 
this general sale, he will endorse his approval upon the certificates hereto- 
fore granted by the certifying agents, and now in the hands of the Presi- 
dent for final decision. The contract, however, above alluded to, contains, 
as I am informed, a provision that "such individual Indian may dissent 
from the contract before its consummation, and his land will be excepted 
from the arrangement." Since this contract was entered into, several In- 
dians of respectable character, inhabitants of the town of Tallassee, in- 
cluding Echo Hadjo, being very much dissatisfied with the arrangement, 
and having had no agency or participation in it, have proposed to sell 
tlieir individual claims to me; and believing that great injustice had been 
done them, and that their claim and title to their lands were indisputable, 
I have agreed, in conjunction with five other gentlemen of this place and 
of Alabama, forming a small company, to purchase these lands. Our ob- 
ject is to obtain good settlements at fair prices, and we have paid, bona fide, 
what is considered a reasonable valuation for all that we have bought. There 
seeming to be no certifying agent at present, the only mode which we could 
adopt of executing the contracts, was, to take conveyances from the In- 
dians to ourselves, together with powers of attorney, giving us the same 
power to dispose of the land, or to obtain titles, that the Indians had or 
might have. These Indians were friendly during the war, were in the 
service of the Government, and acquitted themselves witli credit. They 
are now of the number who have volunteered to go to Florida ; and the 



10 [ Doc. No. 274. ] 

principal man or chief. Echo Hadjn, has the unlimited confidence of Gen- 
eral Jfsiip. and is, in fact, a man of most respectable character. They 
have never sold their lands, although they have been certified to in the fi'au- 
dulent manner so extensively piactised upon this ignorant and unfoitunate 
people. 1 understand that the certified contracts in iheir names are amongst 
those now retained by the i^resideiit, and, unless withheld from the opera- 
tion of this gtiicriil arrangement, will, wln-n approved by him, pass the 
title to the pretended former purchaser. It will readily occur to you, sir, 
and I doubt not to the President also, that if these Indians have never 
heretofore sold their lands bona fide ; if they did not consent to the 
c<»ntract recently made with Walker k Co. and others ; if they dissent 
therefrom, and have sold for a fair price to a bona fide purchaser, this 
last sale ought to be allowed and confirmed. ^^ e have it in our power 
most completely to j)rove that the original contracts, certificates of which 
are now in the President's liamls. purporting to be contracts or sales made 
by these Indians, are false and fraudulent. Wliat I desire, and have to ask 
in behalf of myself and those interested with me, as well as for the In- 
dians themselves, is, that the President may suspend further action upon 
these particular cases, and withhold the certificates from approval and de- 
livery, until we can have an opportunity of sustaining our claims to the 
lands in question, in such manner as may be indicated by you. We shall 
proceed, as soon as practicable, to produce the necessary proofs to Messrs. 
Balch and Craw ford, of the fraudulent nature of the former or old certifi- 
cates, and of the bona fide and fair charactei' of our own contract. We 
expect to obtain fiom these commissioners a rej)ort upoti the subject to the 
President, and shall be content to leave the matter to his wisdom and jus- 
tice. >\'e have at least to request that the cases now presented shall be 
f<»r a time exempted from the operation of the general contract, in order 
that we may be properly heard in behalf of our claims. I hereto annex a 
list of the cases already paid for, and shall go to Tuskegee to-day to close 
the purchase of several others w hich have been contracted for, and a list of 
which w ill also be forwarded to you in the course of three or four days. 
If the commissioners, Messrs. Balch and Crawford, are not empowered to 
make investigations into alleged frauds, and report thereon to the Depart- 
ment of War-, we should be pleased to be informed to whom we shall look 
to hear our evidence in the cases in which we aie concerned, and what 
course will be considered proper foi" us to proceed in the establishment of 
our claims. In conclusion, I beg leave to state that the persons who are 
now adUi-essing you, through me, are not speculators; having none of us 
been interested, either diret'tly or indirectly, in any purchase of Indian 
lands for more than two years past, and have not the slightest connexiwn 
with any fraudulent contracts made with these Indians. Our operations 
are limited to a few half sections lying in a body ; are intended principally 
for individual use ; and we therefore tliink that we are at least entitled to 
be heard fairly, in behalf of claims ojjenly made and honestly paid for, in 
opposition to the overgrown and bl(>ated demands of an extraordinary mo- 
nopoly. 

I am, sir, very respectfully, your obedient servant, 

ALFRED IVERSON. 

Hon. Lewis Cass, 

Secretary of H ar. 



[ Doc. No. 274. ] 11 

List of purchases above referred to. 

Echo Hailjo, Tallassee town, east half section 22, townshi}) 16, range 25. 
Echo Fixico »< south «' " 15 « 16 " 25. 

Wac-se-ho-lata, ♦* west " " 14 " 16 '* 25. 

Toc-ka-sa Fixico, « west << '* 6 << 15 " 25. 

P. S. I have to request that the enclosed letter be submitted to the con- 
sideration of the President as soon as he shall return to Washington, and 
before his final action upon the contracts alluded to. 

A.I. 

Columbus, Ga., September 25, 1836. 

Sir: I herewith transmit an additional list of reservations in which I 
am interested, and which I have to request may be reserved, if proper, from 
the operation of the sale made to General Watson and others, recently, at 
Tallassee, should that sale be approved by the President. 

When 1 wrote you some two weeks since, I was under the impression 
(generally prevalent) that t!ie pui'chase or contract made by General W^at- 
son and others, of all the disputed claims and unsold lands of the Creeks, 
was made in behalf of the fraudulent speculators, and would, if confirmed, 
operate to their exclusive benefit. I owe it to General Watson, and those 
concerned with him in this transat tion, to state, that from information re- 
cently obtained, I am satisfied such was not the fact ; that the contract 
is wholly unconnected with the fraudulent purchasers, and is intended to di- 
vest their title. If the contract was made, as now represented, at the in- 
stance of General Jesup, ami contributed to the speedy removal of the In- 
dians, and was bona jide, I should regict to add any thing to the prejudice 
and opposition which prevails against that contract. All I ask is, that 
the lands which we have purchased, and i)aid for at fair prices, may be ex- 
empt from the operation of the contract above named. 
I am, respectfully, your obedient servant, 

A. IVERSON. 

Hon. L. Cass, 

Secretary of War. 

List of reservations of lands purchased by Devereux Sf Thompson. 

TUCKABATCHE TOWN. 









Section. 


Township. 


Range 


Tom-marth Hadjo 


- 


- E half 


15 


13 


24 


Co-nip Yoholo 


- 


- W '< 


15 


13 


24 


Ich-has Yoholo 


. 


- N '* 


13 


13 


24 


No-case Hadjo 


. 


- N «' 


16 


14 


24 


Ho-ges Hadjo - 


. 


. S '' 


9 


14 


24 


Tuckabatche Hadjo 


- 


- N " 


28 


14 


24 


Tallassee Fixico 


. 


- N " 


21 


14 


24 


Ho-poethley 


. 


- W<' 


34 


14 


24 


Osar Fixico 


. 


- S '* 


6 


13 


25 


Cle-wothle Hadjo 


- 


- S " 


14 


13 


24 



12 [ Doc. No. 274. ] 



Im-nta Hadjo 


- N half 


1£ 


13 


24 


Pascoaf Eiiiarllilar, 


- S «' 


12 


13 


24 


Co-wocke-che 


- N ** 


11 


13 


24 


Elirliotlilcboier - 


. S « 


SO 


13 


25 


Ne-liai-locco liadju 


-N " 
Talmachuseb town 


22 


18 


21 


Ubar-talka 


- S half 


19 


14 


24 


Se-tao-we 


- N " 
Clewella town. 


SO 


14 


24 


Se-b(j(h-ka 


- E half 


31 


17 


22 



These reservations have been purchased by D. Ac T. long before the 
contract was made by Watson #c Co., from Indians who never sold before, 
and whose lands were '^stolen." The company of Iverson, Dent, & Co. 
have purchased one-half of them from D. & T., and, if excepted from the 
operation of the late sale to Watson and others, will be carried before 
Messrs. Balch k Crawford for investigation. 

A. IVERSON. 

We have also purchased two other reservations in the Tallassee town, 
the numbers of which I have not yet obtained. The names of the Indians, 
however, are Big George, (brother of Echo Hadjo, ) and Sparna Fixico, 
both being Indians of Echo Hadjo's town. 

IVERSON, DENT, & Co. 

HEADqUARTERS, ArmY OF TUE SoUTII, 

FortMilchelU September 28, 1836. 

Sir : I received, last evening, your letter of the 1 4th instant ; and 1 liave 
the honor to state, in leply, that, though I considered the arrangement in 
relation to the land unavoidable, I entertained strong doubts of the right 
of the chiefs to enter into the arrangement. 

As to llic gratuities to the chiefs, they actually saved a heavy expense, 
and enabled me to raise a regiment of warriors for service in Florida, 
whirli will be fully as elHcient, and will not cost more thati two-thirds as 
much, as a regiment of white men. The gratuities to the chiefs do not 
amount to two days' expenses of the army, and I sincerely believe they 
forwarded our o|)crations more than three weeks; and not only was ex- 
pense saved, but the troop.^ not discharged were left disposable for ser- 
vice in Florida. 

I am anxiously waiting the return of the steamboats on which the In- 
dian regiment descended to Appalachicola, in order to send the regular 
troops. 

'Jlie warriors are concentrating about fifteen miles west of this place, 
and will be ready to go on should Governor Call require them. 

I have the honor to be, sir, most respectfully, your obedient servant, 

TH. S. JESUP. 

Hon. C. A. Harris, 

Acting Secretary of War, Washington city. 



[ Doc. No. 274. ] 13 

La Grange, Troup county, Georgia, 

October 17, 1836. 
Sir : You will please excuse me for troubling you with those perplex- 
ing questions growing out of that part of the treaty with the Creek In- 
dians, in relation to the conveyance of their reservations. I assure you 
that I should not do so under any other than extraordinary circumstances — 
a high sense of duty which I owe myself, and a full conviction that it will 
afford you ])leasure to be placed in possession of all the facts connected 
with the official acts v\hich you are called on to discharge. Such, sir, is 
the interest I have taken in tiie subject of this communication, that I 
lately visited Nashville, for the purpose of having witli you, in person, an 
interview : but, much to my disapi)ointment and regret, I learned that you 
had a few days before left the Hermitage for Washington. The object of 
this communication is most earneslbj and solemnly to j)rotest, in behalf of 
many otiieis as well as myself, against the approval of a late treaty, com- 
pact, or contract, (as it may be termed^) between General James C. Wat- 
son and others, of the one j)art, and some five or six chiefs of the Tucka- 
batche town, of the other part, for the sale and conveyance of certain classes 
of reservations therein mentioned; comjjrehending, in all, some two hun- 
dred and fifty or three hundred sections of land. Having been refused, 
(for what reason 1 have always been at a loss to conjecture,) by those in 
charge of the matter, the liberty of taking a copy of said contract, I am 
compelled to rely, in speaking of its contents, on sketches takcw from a 
single hasty perusal. If, tl^erefore, I should err in rej)resenting its terms, 
I hope it will be attributed to this cause, and not to a disposition to mis- 
represent. From my sketches, I understand that contract to comprehend 
the reservations of tliose Indians who have died since their names as en- 
titled to land were registered, and subsequent to their location, but be- 
fore a sale of the same before a certifying agent; also, all reservations 
not marked " certified" on the said agent's books ; and all the lands that 
have been stolen, or certified by personating, in Doctor McHenry's dis- 
trict. It must at once strike you most forcibly that those chiefs, being the 
chiefs and headmen of a single town, could have no right, either under 
the treaty or Indian custom, to make such a contract ; thereby assuming 
to themselves the disposition of the individual property of the dead as 
well as the living. By the first article of the treaty, the United States 
gave to each head of a family a half section of land. Now, what right, 
propei'ty, or estate, is thereby created or vested in the Indian ? Does it 
make the subject-matter of the gift, to wit, the land, the sole and indi- 
vidual property (if the head of a family ; or does it create a joint estate 
in him and the balance of his town, his nation, or his principal chiefs ; or 
does it create a trust estate, and constitute his chiefs his trustees ? The 
answer to this question is obvious. The terms of the article above alluded 
to are too plain to admit of a doubt but that it vests a sole and exclusive 
right in each head of a family to his portion, as his individual property. 
Who, then, has the right to dispose of it ? It would follow, as a necessary 
consequence from what has just been said, that the individual whose prop- 
erty it is, and he only, or his legal representative, could legally and 
properly sell and convey it away. But, on tliis point, we are not driven 
to reason or implication. The second article of the treaty settles the 
question, and places it beyond dispute. It contemplates and provides only 



14 [ Doc. No. 274. ] 

for the sale of reservations by those to whom they have been given. It re- 
quires theapnoiiitnicHt of a certifyingageut to examine such contracts ah)ne, 
and authorizes the President to apprcne none other. Is the contract which 
has been, or will be, submittt-d to } ou fur your appioval, such a ofio ? 
Has the Indian, whose land is conveycil, been exaininrd, whetliei- he un- 
derstands till' contract, whether he is willing thereto, and whether he has 
received the consideration paid, or any part tliereol r If so, w here is the evi- 
dence of itr I tinay be contetided (hat the common Indians ha>e, either direct- 
ly, or by established custom, dehgattd to those chiefs the power to sell their 
lands. If expressly conferred, when and where was it done? and what evi- 
dence of it has been furnished the President ? IT by ( ustom, what custom 
justifies it? I'lie chiefs of the uulion (not of a single town) have, ifi gen- 
eral council, (not sccrtt!ij.) by treaty, .sold large tracts of country, when it 
was national and not individual property, to the United States, but not to 
individuuls. There exists no custom to justify such a sale as that presented 
to you. But to pietend that such powers had been delegated, would be an 
assumption most positi\ely conti-adicted by all the facts and cii'cumstances 
connected with the transaction. Of this cinitract, Ihe common Indians 
knew nothing, and could know nothing. At tlie ver-y time of its execu- 
tion, they had collected in huge luimbers about the office of the certifying 
age!it ; and many of those who had stolen their lands, dr-eading the inves- 
tigations of the Government, had I'elinquishecl their* claims to a great 
many locations, and wtre therr fast ielinf|uishing and bringing forward 
the true owners of the lands, who, in almost every instance, were willing 
to sell and r'eceive their money jji-ejiar-ator-y to llieii- departurT west. Such, 
sir', was the state and condition of that branch of the business, as your 
certif} ing agent will repcu't to joii, when theoidei' from Geneial Jcsnp to 
stop the certifying was received at the olKce. At the very period when 
the sole and much-desire<l object of the investigations was about to be ac- 
complished, this contract was thrown irr the way, to prevent it, by the nran- 
agement of those who had no little agency in making those investigatiorrs 
necessary. Sir, when this matter- is properl} understood, it will be found 
to be nothing more nor- less tiian a mor-e o|)en. plausible, and daring attempt 
to take from those Indians w hose lands tiiey |)ietend to sell, that which 
it has been befor-e attemjited to deprive them of. by secretly and corruptly 
using their names, and personating their persons, before the certifying 
agent; artd with the further view of suppressing all fiitnr-e investigations. 
A large portion of those stolen lands have been j)ur'(liased of the true 
owner by third persons, who did so under a full knowledge that the first 
preternled contr'act was fraudulent, with a deii'iininaiion <if ex|)«>sing that 
fr'aurl, if possible, befor-e the invesligating agents of the Goveinment ; and 
should they fail of success in that way, they intenderl r-esoiting to the reg- 
ularly constituted tribunals of the country. Now, all they ask is, that they 
be placed on the same footing with, and iliat no advantage be gi\'en to, the 
fraudulent purchaser- ; and that the ['resident will not gi\e 'hem, by the ap- 
proval of this coritr-act, the sanction of his judgment, and conserpiently 
gr'eafer* weight of rhai'actei', if not complele sccurily, in futiiie inves- 
tigations. Hut, sir*, how cati the Piesidrnt ap])i o\e of a cmitract dis- 
posing of the i-eser-vatiorrs of tlmse Indians w ho ai-e dearl. when, hni^ since,, 
in pur-suance of advice, if not of dii-ectimis, in \ar-i'>u8 letter-s contained, re- 
ceiM-d fr-om the War Df'partmcnf, ailininjstr-ations ha\e been regular-ly 
takerr out, and sales legally made according to the laws td" the Slate of Ala- 



[ Doc. No. 274. ] 15 

bama ? It would seem lo be exceedingly hard and unfortunate that an ad- 
ministrator acting under the advice and directions of the Government, 
and a purchaser buying in conformity with the laws of the State, should 
become sufferers by a change in the views of that Government, or a branch 
thereof. But, sir, apart from all questions of vested rights, or authority in 
and duty of the President to approve, there are circumstances attending 
the execution of that contract, which ouglit, and which nmst when known, 
wholly destroy it. The inadequacy of the price paid for the lands conveyed, 
is not among the least. Seventy- live thousand dollars, for two hundred 
and fifty or three hundred sections of land, worth, at a very low estimate, 
three hundred and fifty or four hundred thousand dollars! This was once, 
as was understood from directions to the certifying agents, a sufficient and 
fatal objection to the approval of any contract. This objection, it is true, 
has been very ingeniously kept from the face of the instrument, and conse- 
quently from the eye of the President, by classifying the lands thereby con- 
veyed, without specifying what quantity each class comprehends. Had 
that been done, it would have appeared that almost one-half of the 
locations in tiiat particular district of country were included, and 
it would have amounted to an insult to have asked the approval 
of the President to such a sale. But it is to be tlie more regretted 
that that small and inconsiderable sum should have been paid out of the 
funds of the Indians, and not with the money of (he purchasers. Such, how- 
ever, is the fact. On the day before the consummation of this contract, (or 
at least within some short time before.) an annuity, and probably two an- 
nuities, was paid to the Indians, (and, if I mistake not, into the hands of 
those chiefs who executed that instrument;) and it was a part of that iden- 
tical money which paid the first payment, to wit, ^37,500, of the afore- 
said purchase-money, and the balance payable on condition tliat the Presi- 
dent approve the sale. 

These, sir, are facts quite notorious with those at all familiar with the 
transaction, and susceptible of the clearest proof. Then, suicly, the President 
cannot approve a contract which, upon its face, has a consideration wholly 
inadequate, and, when examined, is totally without any corsideration what- 
ever. It is to be sincerely hoped that the President will, (before he acts on 
this subject,) by his agents, have a strict and close examination made of all 
the circumstances connected with this contract, let it reflect on whom it may; 
that he may consider well the effect it will and must have in future inves- 
tigations of frauds heretofore practised — frauds, which I have once visited 
Washington for the purpose of exposing, and which I am well convinced 
the President then anxiously sought to investigate. Should he do so, I 
am well satisfied that he will never approve this contract ; in other words, 
this ingeniously devised stratagem to shield from public exposure the most 
fraudulent and iniquitous transactions. 

Very respectfully, your obedient servant, 



The President of the United States. 



WILLIAM DOUGHERTY. 



Green's, near Tuskegee, 

October 19, 1836. 

Sir: By a communication to us from the Commissioner of Indian Af- 
fairs, we are required to give our opinions upon the validity of a contract 



16 [ Doc. No. 274. | 



entered into by James C. Watson and others, with General Jesup, acting 
onbehalCof the United States, and certniji Indian chiefs of the Creek nation, 
covering nearly seven hundred reseivations to heads of Indian families, of 
three hundred and twenty atres each. 

As soon as we received the lettrr <d'Mr. Harris. \vc resolved to pursue 
such a course in this mutter as we believed would give satisfaction to 
General Watson, and to the large ntmibcr of persons w ho claim reserva- 
tions adversely to any rights which he may set up, founded on (he stipula- 
tions of that contract. n> e advised General Wats(»n of the reference which 
had been made to us ; retjuiied him to file n memorial, ])raying that the said 
contract might be sustained; and offering him the option to sup|)ort this 
memorial by such arg(in)ent, in writing, as he might think jiioper. To 
the Honorable Alfred Iverson (whose protest against the confirmation of 
the contract iiuiuestion we transmitted to your Department, and which fiad 
been enclosed to us,) wc sent a copy of tliec«)niract of General Watson, and 
invited a written discussion of its conditions, and a legal examination of 
its validity. 

As soon as these documents come into our oflice. and which will be in a 
few days, we shall |)j()eeed to examine thenu aiefnlly, and shall prejiare our 
written opinions ii|)on the whole case, foi- the derision of the President. 

If any additional steps are, in your judgment, necessary to be taken to 
render our examination of this matter more complete and satisfactory, we 
will tiiank you to suggest them. 

The j)osition of General Jesuj) in this transaction is a <lelicate one; and 
entei'taining, as we do, a thoroiigli conviction tliat he acted in it with a 
view ojily to the promotion of the jjiiblic interest, we thought it due to him 
to proceed in a formal manner, lest lie and the publir might suppose, in the 
event of a decision agaiust a very important oflicial act of his, that we had 
jjroceeded with improj>er haste, and overturned what he had done, without 
due care and consideration on our part. 

With great respect, wc havetlie honor to be your obedient servants, 

T. HARTLEY CRAWFORD, 
ALFRED BALCH, 

Commissioners. 

Hon. B. F. BiTLEK, 

Secretary of War, TTashington. 



CoLUMBvs, Georgia, 

October '29, 18S6. 
Sir: I have been instructed by Iverson, Dent, &: Co. to notify the De- 
partment of War that they are tlie ))urchasers of half section E. 5, 15, 24, 
located to Micco Hatkai", an Indian of the Tuskegee town of Creek Indi- 
ans. 1 am also authori/.ed to say, in behalf of the Indian above mentioned, 
that he dissents fi'om the contract made with General Watson and others 
with certain chiefs at Tallassee, ^cc, and requests that his land maybe 
exempted from its operation, if approved. I have to request that this case 
be considered upon the same footing as those heretofore indicated by me to 
the Department. Wc have declined, at present, making any further pur- 
chases; and should these few cases in which we arc interested be excepted 



[ Doc. No. 274. ] 17 

from the contract of Watson and otiKTs, we shal! have no cause or objection 
to iji'ge aj^ainst the aj)j)rovai of that contract, and bi'.c; to he cojisitlcred as 
withdrawing any opjjosition heretofore indicated against ic. 
1 am, respectfully, vour obedient servant, 

A. I VERS ON, 
for 
IVERSON, DENT, & Co. 
Hon. B. F. 13 in LEU, 

Secretary of War. 



Green's, near Tuskegee, Alabama, 

December 1, 1836. 

Sir : A communication from the Commissioner of Indian Affairs of ti»e 
22d September last, addresse*! to the commissioners for investigating al- 
leged frauds in the purchase of the resei-vations of the Creek Indians, re- 
fers to them a contract entered into by J. C. Watson and others, on the 
28th of August last, vvitii certaiji chiefs, which has been sanctioned by 
General Thomas S. Jesup, subject to the ratiilcation of the President of 
tlie Uiiited States. The i-efereiice and accompanying instructions state 
tiiat " an important step has been taken by General Jes'.ip for the dispo- 
sition of the lands in Dr. McHenry's district, the contracts for which have 
been contested. From a consideration of the present enjbarrassed condi- 
tion of the Creeks, and a conviction of the desii-ableness and necessity of 
their instant removal, he has given his sanction, subject to tiie approval 
of the President, to a contract for the sale of tiiese ti'acts. Copies of his 
letter, of the contract, and other paj)ers less directly connected with this 
transaction, you will find encloseil. No opinior! has been expressed by the. 
Department upon this pj-oceeding ; but General Jesup i]as been advised of 
this reference of the [)a|)ers to you. I Imve to request that yofl will give 
them a thorough investigation, with a view to ascertain the beai'ing they 
have, or may have, upon measures previously taken tor the ^ale of tiiese 
lands; and whether any ohji^ction. arising out of the provisions of tlie laws 
of the State, or of the treaty witli the Creeks, can he sustained. The re- 
sult of this investigation yon will rei)ort as early as [)racticsble for tlie con- 
sideration of the. President." 

Immediately on the receipt of tiie within, the commissioners gavenotiLC 
to General J. C. Watson, one of the purchasers by the contract, and t!ie 
first wiio signed it, of the reference ; requesting hint t-) take such steps as 
he might he advised were ])ro])er, as soon as he conveniently could. He 
gave it early attention, as did several of tlie others (jjerhaps all) wiio were 
associated with him in the jiurch.ise. Those who were interested to op- 
pose the ratification of tiie agreement, and were known, were at the same 
time informally acquainted witli its submission to the commissioners. Of 
these notifications, the several memorials, evidence, and arguments, Jiere- 
with transmitted, were the fruit ; and the pretensions, inteiests, and vievv's 
of the contendii-ig parties were fairly rrjir-esented and brought before the 
commissioners, to which end the fullest oppm-tu'iity was given to tliem, re- 
spectively J which has protracted our action longer than was desirable, but 
2 



18 [ Doc. No. 274. j 

it was iinavoidablo. Giealor haste might, and probably wonld, have pro- 
UuccU (lissatislactioii ; and it' it did not, wmihl have been itiexciisable in 
those charged with such responsible tlnties. Tlie question is one of the 
fust inipiTssion. Vast interests are involvo-il : the ccMiscquences must be 
of very extensive operation, as the conliact may he allirtncd or repudiated, 
and this cnmminiity is deeply exciteil on the subjrct. It \n as due to all 
tliese considei ations that every i-easonable indulgence should he granted to 
the parlies on either side of the question, and their counsel ; and that iheir 
representations and arguments, the contract, and all the attendant circum- 
«tances, should receive. fr(un the commissioners the gravest deliberation. 

The dilliculties that involved the Indians, and encompassed General Jes- 
up in regard of them, sulliciently a|)pear by the letter of Opothe Yoholo of 
56lii August last, to that ollicei', and by his communication td" next day to 
tlie Commissioner of Indian Aft'air-s ; and whatever opinion may beentei-- 
tained and ex|wessed of the \ alidity of the conliact, it is manifest that the 
purest and most patriotic motives inftuenced the commanding general in 
sanctioning it. His letter of the 30th August to the Secretary of Wai-, 
Contains a frank exposition of his feelings and opinif)ns on the occasion, and 
ieaxes no place to doubt that he yielded to what seemed to him an ovei*- 
ruling necessity, and ad(t|)te(l his course when theie a|)pcared to be no al- 
ternative. "Nothing short of the absolute necessity of satisfying tlie In- 
dians, and removing from their minds the impressioti that they would re- 
ceive nothing for their lands, would have induced me, under any circum- 
stances, to have sanctioned it." Besides the above contract, he effected on 
the same day an arrangement, by which a body of Creek wai'riors were 
engaged for service in Florida, to aid in suppressing the Semimde hostili- 
ties ; and it is highly probable, if not certain, iliat this last agreement was 
greati/ facilitated by the fust : they were jiarts of one whole. 

The ^onti-act, which is executed by Opothe Yoholo, Mad Blue, Tucka- 
batche Micco, Little Doctor, (chiefs of the Tuckabatche town,) Jim 
Boy, (chi"f of Thlobthlocco town,) and Tustenugge Chopco, "(chief of Tal- 
lassee town,) is as follows : 

State of Alabama, 
Tallapoosa ''.oiintij. 

This indenture, made and concluded at the town of Tallassee, in the coun- 
ty and State af(,resaid, on the 28th day of August, A. D. 1836, between 
the United State- of America, of the first part; and Opothe Yoholo, Mad 
Blue, Tuckabatch-i Micco, Little Doctor, and Jim Boy. chiefs of the Creek 
tribe of Indians, aid James C. Watson, Edward Ilanrick, >Villiam Walk- 
er Ac Company, IVei- C. Harris, and John Peabody, of the thinl j)art, 
witnesseth : That wheieas, by a treaty between the United States of Amer- 
ca and the Creek tribe of Indians, ratified in the year (»f our Lord 1832, 
each head of a family b.'longing to said tribe became entitled to one half a 
section of land, which was subsequently allotted according to the same: 
and whereas, by the same treaty, it was j)rovided that no sale should be 
valid, unless the contract should meet with the approbation of an agent of 
the United States, and confuniation by the President thereof; and where- 
as the parties of the hccond j)art allege. o:j behalf of individuals of the said 
tribe, that frauds have been jjerpetrated upon the holders of land under 



[ Doc. No. 274. ] 19 

the said treaty, whereby their titles have become involved with diiritulty, 
their lights jeopardized, and confidence in their security impaired : atid 
whereas investigations have taken place without results, and they are 
about to leave the lands ceded. Cur their homes in the west : To the end of 
.settling all their business in this country ; of transCerring from tlK-mselves 
the burden of litigation, and of obtaining soincthiiig for their claims jno- 
portioned to their value, and at the same time to make a j)rovision f(/r the 
lair and bona lide j)urchasers from the people of theii* tribe : they havo ad- 
vised their people holding said claims to accede to a general disposition (»f 
them, and have obtained their consent to remise, release, and foi-ever quit 
claim (on the j»art (d'all and each of them) to the parties of the third part, ami 
each of them, of all their right, title, interest, claim, and demand to all tlic 
tracts and ])arcels (»f land, situate, lying, and being in that part of the tei'ii- 
tory ceded in the treaty aforesaid, com[)rised within the distiict of lands in 
which R. W. McHenry was the certifying agent, which has formed tin; 
subject of contest bel'oie the agents of tlie United States, and which have 
either been certified and marked for reversal, or which have been sold 
and certified without autlujrity in the agents of the United States to wit- 
ness said sales, or certify said contracts, (the same being the cases con- 
tained in the i'e|)orts of the investigating agents ;) subject, In.'wcver, to the 
restrictions imposed by the party of the first part, as follows : 

*• 1st. That tiie title hereby obtaitied, or which may he obtained in pur- 
suance of this contract, shall not intei'fere with the rights (d' any Individ- 
ual who has made a prior valid contract with the i-ightful clairjiaJif of said 
lands, (whether the same has been certified or not,) or any part thereof; 
but the respective claiiris(if necessary for settlement) sliallbe iuvestigiited 
by an agent appointed by the President of the United States, and the ratifi- 
cation of the President shall be necessary to the peid'ection of the titles. 

•♦ i*rovided, nevertheless, that for the ascertainment of the fairncs 
and validity of any claim, as well as for liie protection of the parties of the 
third j)art, they shall be entitled to tiie benefit of the same rules that the 
Indians would have been entitled to hut for this contract, under the instruc- 
tions of the War Dejiartment. 

*' 2nd. That when any cimtract shall be preferred by the said agent upon 
investigation, the |)arties of the third part shall be entitled to the same 
security lor the consideration as the Indian would have had but for this 
C(mtract ; provitled, if the amount paid into the hands of the agent of the 
United States shall exceed, on any j)arcel of land, the pro rata valuation 
made in this contract, then one half of said overj)lus shall be i-etaincd by 
the agent for the Indian located upon said reserve, oi-, if dead, his heirs. 

♦' 3d. That the tnoney hereafter stipulated to be paid, shall be paid to 
the Indian entitled to the land, \» presence of the chief, and an officer of 
ttie United States ; and until such payment he made, it shall be deposited 
with the certifying agents of the dis;rict. The payment of which shall 
be a consunnnation of this contract. 

" 4tli. That if any one Indian holditig any parcel of land herein con- 
veyed, shall refuse to cariy into effect the provisions of this contract, 
in that case a pro rata allowance ujMm il»e cfMisideratimi herein sipuliieil. 
shall be made to tlic j)arties of the third part : provided tiiis conseiit shall 
be given hefote the consummation of this cotitcai't. 

♦•5th. That all those lands, which have not been sold, includii g li'ose 
where the Indian has died before sale, shall be taken at a valuation to he 



to [ Doc. No. 274. 3 

inade by tlic persons wiio may be appointed by the ncjent nf tlie United 
States, wbu slujll fiiiaHy ( !om- tlie arrangements piovi'Ied for in tbis ron- 
tracl, and tbe treaty : pri>vi(led, tbat Ibis sbull not refer to any claims em- 
braci'd in jjrevious articles of tbis rontrai:t : and provided turtber, tliat 
valid titles can be obtained tberefor. 

"Tlic parties of tbe tliird i)art aj^ree to receive tbe conveyance hcrein- 
befiir niade, subject to all tbe conditions and stipulations lierein contained, 
and will pay tberefor tbe suni of seveniy-five tbousand dollars; one-balfto 
he paiti upon tbe sealing of tlje^^e jUTsen's, to tbe agent (jf tbe United 
States wbo may be appointed to receive tbe same ; and one-lialf in four 
moiillis, at Fort Gibson, in tbe State of Arkansas. 

'♦ In testinjony wbereof, I, Jobn A. Camj)bell, ajjpointed by Major 
General Tbomas S. Jesup, commanding Soutbern arnjy, as agent of 
llie United States to execute tbe same, &c. 

"JOHN A. CAMPBELL. 

*' III testimony wbereof, we bave bercunto set onr bands, and affixed our 
seal:-, tbe day and dale above w rilten. 

Opotbe Yobolo, bis x mark. 

Mad lilue. bis x mark. 

'ruckabatcbe-Micco, bis x mark. 
'I'ustenugge Cbopco, bis x mark. 
Little Doctor, bis x mark. 

Jim Boy, bis x mark. 

J. C. W'atson, 
Witnesses : Edward Hanrick, 

Jolin Page, >ViHiam Walker, 

Cfl/)/. Sn-pt. Creek Removal. Peter C. Harris. 

J. V. Lane. Jobn Peabody. 

Capt. U. S. .irmy. 
K. Marsball, Interpreter. 

'' Sanctiotied by me, subject to tbe ratification of tbe President of tbe 
United States, August 28, 1 836. 

''THOMAS S. JESUP. 
** Maj. Gen. Commanding Jirmy of the South. 

<'Tbis contract sball apply to tbe towns only of Coosawda's, 'I'licka- 
batcbe.'s, EufaUi's, Kialiga's, Cbattossofkins, Ko!jo-mats-ka-catcb-ka, 
L'«cliip"gi>. Soiigabatcbce, Tallassee, Tuskegee, Cliebaw town on Eufala 
crerU, i'lilobtblocco, (Jim Boy's,) Clewalla, Talmacbussce, Towarsa, 
Ottesa, Autauga. Tbe ( biefs before stated, (ieclaring tbat tbey bad no 
advice or consent from llie oliier towns. August 28, 183G. 

JOHiN A. CAMPBELL. 

"Tbe Tallassee cbief declared, w ben he signed tbe contract, tbat be 
had not the assent of bis jjcoplc to tbe act." 

THOMAS S. JESUP. 

♦ » We do hereby acknowledge to bave received from John Page, agent 
of tbe United States, who was apj)oiiited by Major General 'IMionias S. 
Jesup to receive tbe same from tbe parties of tbe third part, mentioned 



[ Doc. ISTo. 274. ] 21 

within, thirty.seven thousand and five hundred dollars in cash, and the 
note of t!ic parties of the third {(art, payable at four months, for the same 
sum. Tiiat this has been done at the instance and consent of our j)eop!e 
interested herein, and for distribution among them whose rigiitshave been 
disposed of. — August £9tli, 1836. 

Done in our presence : 

Opothe Yoholo, his x mark. 

Th. W. Bateman, Mad Blue, his x mark. 

Linit. J. Insp. and Dis. Jigent. Tuckabatchee Micco his x mark. 

Barent Dubois, Little Doctor, his x mat k. 

Jlssvitant Jigent. Jim Boy, his x mark. 

James L. Alexander, Tustenugge Chopco, his x n)ark. 

.Assistant .Sgent. Tnsconer Hadjo, his x mark. 

Colche Emarthia, his x mark. 

It is worthy of remark, that the chiefs had no personal interest what- 
ever in the subject matter of tiie contract, which was coJifined exclusively 
to halt sections. 

The first bi-anch of the inquiry is, what bearing may tiiis contract have 
upon measures heretofore taken for the sale of the Indian reservations? 

If it shall be ratified by the President, it will obviously transfer to the 
vendees all the rights that remained to the Indians, as well of lands as of 
money due on fair purchases, and will extinguish all Indian claims, except 
to one-half of any surplus that may be received for a tract of land (liere- 
tofore sold, and the contract for whicli shall ''be preferred" or sustained,) 
beyond the proportion that $75,000 bear to the whole district embraced iu 
the agreement. The lands that have never been sold are not, of course, 
included in this observation. As to them, tiie pre-emption is sicured 
to the purchasers at a just valuation ; but as to the lands which have been 
the subject of controversy, Creek titles, securities for money, and "the 
benefit of the same rules that the Indian'* was entitled to, ai'e all trans- 
ferred. With the exceptions above noted, this compact will remove tiie 
Indian from the ground on which he stood, and substiuite for him those 
who will itave been placed in his position ; henceforward the contest will 
be between white men. The purchasers are themselves iioldeis of nume- 
rous contracts which this arrangement will establish. All the lands re- 
certified must become theirs, (and they seem to have been in the miufis of 
all parties to this proceeding ;) for the i'e-certification by the agent, licfore 
the reversals were confirmed by tlie President, was, with the single excep- 
tion of a written admission of fraud, without authority, according to the 
construction v.liich has (rightly I conceive) been given to the ti'eaty ; and 
if Colonel Hogan's action of reversal was in evei-y instance well founded, 
the agreement would throw into their hands upwards of 200,000 acres of 
land ; reserving, however, "the rights" of any individual who lias made a 
prior valid contract with the rightful claimant of the said lands, (whether 
the same has been certified ov not,) oi* any part thereof." As in a huge 
shai'e of the cases overturned by Colonel Hogan, the parties did rmt ap- 
pear, it is n()t uniikeh' they tnay be able to show in n)any instances fair 
and honest contracts ; and there may, and probably will, be numerous 
fair "prior" conti'acts, that have never been certified, and that would be 
good against these vendees, however they may be r-egarded as against the 
Indians. How niany there may be of either or both classes, nothing short 
of an investigation can disclose. To whatever extent they may leach, the 



22 I Doc. No. 274. J 

conlrf)V(TS!c.s to wliicli the piirclia'^crs will be exposed must necessarily 
invdUc great tnmble ant! considerable expense; but it is nnt tt) be snp- 
j)t)sod tliev would have entered into this large business wilhtnit the reas«>fi- 
sible expectation <d" a prtifit. correspondent to their outlay and all the dif- 
ficulties that SMI-round it. As, therefore, the contract, in the event of its 
conliiMialion, will put an end. now and forever, to all measures lor- sales 
hy Irrdians, of iheii- reservations, (with the foi-ei^oing exception^,) ami 
mnsf, as indeed it shonld, ii-snlt in the realization by tiie pur cliaser-s of a 
sum sullicient (o remunerate thern. it follows that the •• bearing" «>f the 
conlriKt cannot be lavorable to the Indian reservees, who, if tlie agree- 
inent is a good one for the vendees, must rcceixc a nnr( h smaller* sum 
than would arise from a <lisposition of theic lands and a jji-osecntion of 
their- interests, in the rrrode heretofoi-e jiresci-ibed. In tlic opinion of wit- 
nesses w ho ha^e hi-en examined, and whose testiirrony you will receive 
li«'i-i-with, the loss to those whose lands are within the circle drawn by the 
contract must, if it should he ratified, be ver-y great. 

The secorrd aspect irr uhich the commissioner-s ai-e instr-ucteil to look at 
the corrtr-act, makes it their dirty to inrpiir-e whether it is obrroxious to any 
well-founded ohjt-ctions ni:dei- the lawsof Alabanra and thetr-eatyof 183il? 

The treaty makes a |)lain case of tr-ust. The United Slates are the 
trustees of tiie Cieek, and the legal title is vested in them to jrrevent im- 
provident sales. Tiie Indian is the cestuy qui trust, holding the beiie- 
frciary e\ idence. Ninety ( hiefs, and each head (d" a family, are severally 
entitled t<i select a tract of land, which "shall be reserved from sale. 
fiir their nse, for" the tei-m of live years, unless sooner disposed of by them.'* 
They may efl'ect sales, by cnnreT/tnicc, to any oiher persons for a fair* cori- 
sider-aiiorr, ••in such maniK-i- as the I'r-esident may direct ." rrpon his a])- 
pi-ol)ation of the contr-ac; that may "be certified by some person a|ipoint- 
ed for- that pui-post-," the same shall be valid, and "a title shall be giverr 
by the United States on the completiorr of the payment;'* and if, at the 
end u\' liveyear-s, any of the reservees choose to i-emain. tiiey shall receive 
jratcnts in fee-sirn;)le for their selections. The feeble teiurre by which the 
Irrdians formerly held their lands was surrendered by the treaty, and a 
deeper- and rnor-e abiding interest created, v\hich that instrument j)Ut into 
their- hands, and enahh-d them to seize l>y a fii-mei" gi-asp. In no part <dit 
is there any prdvision which goes to limit their- usufruct of the land, which 
is clearly, in my judgment, co. extensive, irr dur-atioir with the legal estate 
held by the Go\er-nment. Thei-e is no re(|uir-einent of residence. n«n* 
])enalty on alrandonment. The use is to continue for five years, if the 
Indian chooses ; and then, if it be his pleasure, to r-ipen into a full arrd 
perfect right. If his interests or w i><hes lead him to a sale, he is to cnnveii — 
what ? I'r-oper-iy in the land, (d" which the jxir-chaser is to i-eceive the full 
evidence iir the shape of a patent. Indepernlently of the special pr-ovisions 
of the treaty, which restrict thern to a ricsignated coirr-se. the character* 
whicli the Unite<l States have assume«l by tiiat inslrrrment would prevent 
Ihem funn efTeciing a sale withoirt Indian assent; for- it is a settled princi- 
ple of law, that "the trustee is consider-ed merely as the instrument of 
corrveyance. arid can in rio shape :inect the estate, unless by alienation for 
a valuable considei-alioii to a pni-chasei*, without notice :" which could not 
he alleged, as the Cr-<fk r-igh's and interest, and the seciir-ify thrown around 
theirr, are of such jnrbliiity and character-, that all must h(> pr-esumed to 
know them. Tlie Indian holds "a liefeasible fee — a qualified fee," in the 
language ul the supreme court of Alabama, [Chinrrubbee vs. Nicks et al. 



[ Doc. No. 274. J as 

— June (rrm, 1836, MSS.] vvliicli descends upon his heirs, according to the 
laws of the State, and has been ol'ten sohl under (h-crees of the courts 
(HI llie application of his administrator ; and this interest, in combination 
with the legal title in the United States, constitutes a full and perfect 
])roperty in the [and. It may be important to keej) in view and separate 
the interest of the Creek, which is the whole usufruct, from tiie jjower ; 
and it is no moi-e than a power reserved by tiie United States to control 
his contract, and t(» furnish the titJe as conchisive pro'>f of that contract. 
It has been contended, in argutnerU, that tlie rnsti-ument now under con- 
sideration is exceptionable, on the ground of non-conformity to the law 
of Alabama, inasmuch as tlie authoi'ity, if any existed, from the individual 
Indians to the chiefs who signed the contract, is not in. writing. The law 
of the State, which is supposed to sustain this opinion, proviiles that *'n(> 
action shall be brought whereby to chai'ge any executor oi- administratoi-, 
upon any special piomise, to answer any debt or damage out ai' his own 
estate, or whereby to ciiarge the defendant Uj)on any special i)romisc, to 
answer for the debt, default, or miscarriage of another pej-son ; or to 
cliai'ge any person upon any agreement niade upon consideiation of mar- 
riage ; or upttn any contract for the sale of lands, tenements, or heredita- 
ments, (ji- the making any lease thereof for a larger term than one year ; 
or uj)on any agreement, which is not to be performed witliin the space of 
one year from the making thereof ; unless t!ie ])rotni.se or agreement, upott 
which such action shall be br-ought, or some memcn-andum or note thereof, 
shall be in writing, and signed by the party to be char-ged thei'ewith.or some 
other persorj by hi'U thej-eunto lawfully autlmrized." The force of this 
objection is not felt. The above is very closely co{)ied from the 4th sec- 
lion of the statute of 29 Car. II. ch. 3., and does not contain the requi- 
sition insisted on. The 1st and 3d sections of the statute of Charles 
re(juire that an agent, who assigns or conveys estates, should be *• there- 
unto lawfully authorized bif writing;" and the distinction between a mere 
agreement to sell, where the authority may be by parol, and a conveyance, 
wlierc it must be in writing, is fully recognised in England. Sugden*s 
Law of Vendors. 74 : Advertisement to Roberts on Fi-auds. 10; Mort- 
lock vs. Buller, lO Vesey's Ch. Rep. 310, 311, ' 2 Starkie on Evidence. (cd. 
of 1834) p. 351 ; and in Ireland, (where the statute of frauds was copied 
fi-om the English law.) by the justly celebrated chaiu'ellfu'. Lord Redes- 
ilale, in Clinan vs. Cooke, l ; Schoales & Leiroy, 22 — vide Coles rs. 
Trecothick, 9 Vesey's Ch. Rep. 234. The provisions of the 1st and Sd 
sections of 29th Car. 11. have not been i-e-enacted in Alabama, and witii- 
out determining whether the contract of 28th August is an engagement to 
convey, or amounts to an actual conveyance, it is suihcient to observe, that 
the laws of this State do not refpiire the authority of an agent who signs 
•♦a contr-act for tite sale of lands, tenements, or hereditaments" to be in 
writing. Whether, in point of fact, there was authoi'ity. and, if there 
was, whether the treaty and the mode of transfer j)resciibed in it are not 
at war with such authority, ai e other and very different questions, to be 
hereafter' cou'^idered. 

Notwithstanding the authority of the agent is not required to he in 
wi'iting, yet there is another ground, nf)t mentioned by counsel, in connex- 
ion with the statute of frauds of Alabama, though commented on by them 
for a (lifTerent purpose, which strikes me as giving to that law a fatal op- 
oration on this contract. Uj)on an examination of the agreement and tes- 
timony, it will be apparent that Opothe Yoholo, Mad Blue, Tuckabatchee 



24 [ Doc. No. 274. ] 

Micco. aiul I>itlIo Doctor, cliicfs ol" riirkabatclioc town, and Jiin Boy, 
cliit'l" of 'J'lilobllilocco, r('j)r<'.soiiti'<l llit'se town-, and tlit'ui alone. Tiic 
only other Indian win* signed the arra/»isemeiit was Tuslfnuggcc L'liopco, 
cliiel' ol" the 'I'al lassie town, which is tak»*n ont of the contract by his dec- 
Jaration. made at the time of j-igninj;, and cnlerKi hy Genci'ai Jesnpat the 
foot of the paper, *'that he had not tin' assent ol liis people to the act." 
(Siigden's Law ol' Vendors, 75.) 'i'hi' iiupiii-y here is in search oi' (luihuriiii 
to sign the agreement, ant), ui conrse. piece<ling il ; if this he wanting, aller 
consent will not vuir. ijie tielVct. (Morthu k vs. iiiitler, 10 Vesey'sCii. Kep. 
31 1.) Il cannot be maiulained that the above ciii*'t's, as smc/i, had power to 
hin<l the Indians of Casawda. Enfala, Kialega, Chaltofsofker, Ko-ho- 
niuts ka-catcii-ka, Luci!e|»oga. Sougaliatchee, Tiiv.kegee, Chehew town nti 
Kiilala creek, Clewalla, 'ralmaciiussee, 'I'owarsa, Ottessa, and Autauga 
towns ; ami you will look in \ain lor any evidence «if theii- assent to tiiis 
contract prioi- to its execution ; and yet these fourteen towns ai-e mentioned 
hy \Miting on the agreement, as emltiiued liy it. Captain I'age* states 
that he went to the square of (as I understood him) Tuckabatchee town, to 
pay over the nn)ney ; that he explained the contract and the amount of 
consideration ; that *Mriany of the chiefs of the Uppei- Creeks were pres- 
ent, and many ot their peoj)lc ;" that he believes tlie contract was perfectly 
undeistoofi by them, as they were several tiays in council on the business, 
and on ibat vei-y rlay consulted for an h'»ur before they said they compre- 
hemled the matter-; thai there was no o!)jectioii, and tliey were ready to 
receive the money. Can sti-ongcr pi'oof be adduced that they had not con- 
sented t<» the coritr-act on the 28tli Airgust ? If they had. why consult 
about what was befur'c air-arrged between tiiemselves and the contractiirg 
chiefs? But we arc not left to conjectuie ; h>r the captain says Opothc 
Y(di(j|o stated to him that Jim Boy iiad gone home (on the day thecotitr-act 
was ma;le, 1 ])iosume, and cerlairrly after* it: was exenrted,) •' to consult 
his people on lln^ sultject." This kind of aiithor-ity, us r-amblingas their 
habits, and as loose as their morals, is not what tire law irrpiires. Toerr- 
ablc otre man to bind another by contract, full authority must be confer- 
red ; il must be inrlividually given by each, for himself; as they had sev- 
eral inter-ests and pi-operty, so tnirst the power* to others to birrd them he 
several. (Mortlock r.s. Duller-, before citerl, 10 Vesey's Ch. Rep. 311.) No- 
thirrg shmtof it carr divest theii- estates, 'i'he declaration made hy tlieTal- 
Jassee chief, and the form of it — '• tlie assent of his people;" the tt-rins 
emplo>ed in the corrtiact, tirat tiic chiefs who were parties to it "have 
advised thtir pcopU'f holdirrgsald claims, to accede to a gerreral dispositimr 
of them ;" and tlie fact ci^mmunicated to Captain Page by Opothe Ycdiolo, 
that Jim Boy had gone home, after the conti-act was signed, ♦' t<» consult 
his people on the suliject ;" all prove corrclusively that the chiefs arr-ogated 

• Tile deposition of Captain Pape has been twice taken, anfl as often objected to by the 
counter-memorialis'.s, on lejjal gionnds, arisinpoui of non conformity to tiie notice of taking 
it, and of irregularity in the service of itie notice ; a. tliirJ order Itas been pranted for tak- 
ing it. I liave seen the depositioii made on each occasion, vviien offi red and excepted to ; 
and as, from tlie captain's high rc|mtatiiin for inte.cjrity, liis tehlim'<ny will he always the 
same in siil)stance, I have, in forming my opinion, used the facts lie furnishes, which liis 
deposition, npidarly taken, will establish, when il shall be forwarded to the War Depart- 
ment. I have l.ad the less diflicully in doing so, as the evidence, in my view, operates 
against the priil\ Jsoliritoiis to prodMce it, imd longer delay will be thereby prevented. 

Tfie depo>iiti( n of Capiain t'age, recjnlirly t^ken, has been filed since tlie above note was 
made, and will form a pari of this transmission. 



[ Doc. No. 274. ] 25 

to themselves the power of bargaining away lands that (lid not belong to 
them, am) over wliicii tlioy had no rightful control. But it may he said 
that '* inany {hiefs of the Upper Creeks were })reseiit, and lUAuy of their 
people," at ruckahatchec square, and assented. Without dwelling upon 
the insufiiciency of this general consent, expressed through their chiefs, 
and the time when, it may he asked, who were those chiefs ? of what towns 
were they the heads ? how many or how few of tiieir people " j)resent" 
were entitled to lands, or interested in the contract ? and how many of 
the foui'teen towns within named Xvere represented by chiefs, or nienibers 
in tliiscouricil? how many, even in this sweeping way, haveconsenied ? All 
is uncertainty. Tiie obligation of establishing the authority of the chiefs 
who assumed the relation of vendors, was upon the purchasers. They 
have not shown it. On the contrary, with the fullest opportunity to do 
so, they have failed in furnishing this all-important link in the chain ; for 
the payment made by Job Taylor to some thirty-seven or thirty-eight 
Indians — we know not whom — of Chattofsofker, is not shown to have been 
made to tiiose entitled to land ; that they knew what they were receiving 
it foi-, or conversed about the contract at the time, much less assented to 
it ; while ther-e is negative testimony by Thomas S. Woodward, a witness 
lor the memorialists, which proves that Jim Boy *' understood tlie said 
contract as including all tiie disputed lands in fiis town.'' No authority 
over tiiB fourteen towns namesi, or their inhabitants, belonged to the 
chiefs who signed the c(n>tract, by virtue of their offices, nor by special del- 
egation, nor any consent given antecedent to the contract. And theTallas- 
see chief having confessedly neither power nor assent, it cannot be en- 
forced against them in Alabama, even on the supposition that they nfter- 
warils severally assentec! to it; for, so f^ir as tliey wei-e concerned, the agree- 
ment was not signed by the j)arties to be charged therewith, nor by any 
person or persons by them »• thereunto lawfully authorized." The statute 
of {"rauds of the State will ap[)ly with equal force to the Tuckabatchee and 
Th!obthh)CCO towns, if it shall a|)pear tliat the contr-acting chiefs were not 
specially and previously authorized to make tlie contract by their own 
})eople. Ko such authority has been established or shown ; and it will be 
seen, in tlie course of this opinion, that their official character and attri- 
butes did not give it. It need only be further remarked, that the case of 
the memorialists, in this branch of it, is not strengthened by the pay- 
ment to the agent of one-half of tha sum agreed on ; for it is now consid- 
ered to be fixed and settled law, that part payment of t,he consideriition 
money does not take a case out of the statute of frauds. It appears to me, 
therefoi'e, that the entire transaction is inoperative and vicious. 

The contract has been assailed on the ground of inadequacy of consid- 
eration, and evidence adduced in suppoi-t of the objection. This agi*ee- 
ment I believe to have been one of entire fairness. Colonel John A. 
Campbell, a lawyer of high standing, and a member of the Legislature of 
Alabama, was selected by Genei'al Jestip, and authorized by oi-der of 28th 
August, " to aid the Indian chiefs in the arrangement of tlieir land claims, 
should they think propei- to discuss, or acccjit, the pi-oposition made to 
them by the comjyany of Watson, Walker, awd others." It was approved 
by Genei-al Jesup, as estimable in |n'ivate life as distinguished for public 
conduct; and it is averred in the memorial of the purchasers, and not con- 
tradicted, (which might have been easily done, if the facts admitted of it,) 
that tlie pariiculiir terms of said contract "were arranged between the 



26 [ Doc. No. Q71. ] 

agents of the United States and tijemselves ; tliat tliey did not rnnsiilt or 
advise with tlie Indian rhii-fs aforesaid, but witli tin- olVicers of tlie United 
States, who ronimnnicated the ptojxjsitions of the Indians to them, and re- 
ceived their answers for the Indians;" and wc have the statement of Cidonel 
Campbell that he knew of •» no nnfairness. eitliei' in the negotiation oi- t-x- 
eculion of this contract :" which is conlir-nied by the testimony of Captain 
Page. The (|iiestioti recurs as to the iiiade(-|uacy of consideration. I'er- 
haps no |)ritirip|e ol law is better setth-d than that mere ina(le(iuacy of 
j)rice is no ground i'ov the court to set aside an agreement, "if it appears 
to have been fairly entered intoand understood;" unless, imlecd.wheie itis 
*<so gross, strong, and manifest, that it must be impossible to state it to a 
man of common sense, without producing; an exclamation at the inecpialitv 
of it." ("nio. Hutler et nl..vs. E. Haskell, 4 E.p Kep. So. Car. 692.) 'i'h'e 
language of Chancellor Kent ol' New York is cfpialiy ]H)inted: "'rhc 
iue(|iiality amounting to fr-aud must be so strong and manifest as to shock 
the conscience and conlound the judgment of any man of common sense." 
(Osgood rs Franklin, 2 Johns Cli.Kep. 23.) In this case,the price stipulated 
was seventy-five thousand dollars. The district of Doctor McHenry, cm- 
braced by the contract, would cover, according to my estimate, six 
hundred and thirty tracts, or two hundred and one tfiousand ami six 
hundred acres oi' land : (t!ie argutnents of counsel on either side make 
the (juantity larger;) for which the sum mentioned wouhl give thirty-seven 
rents and a fraction per* acre. Tlie considei-ation was adopted, as Colonel 
Campbell inloiins us, by deducting thirty-thi-ee per cent, from the price'at 
which the certificates were originally given, '"for the contract tiiat would 
be determined against" the vendees. (See his statement.) Mi-. W. Thomp- 
son, a respectable witness for the C(!nnter-memorialists, is of o])inion that 
the half sections in Jim Boy's town (and he knows the (|uality well) art^ 
\v<n til one thousand dollai-s each, of wiiicli there are some fifty-lour : while 
Thomas S.Woodward, a witness for the memorialists, consiilers •• the mo- 
ney which lias been jireviously paid to said town foi- lands, togethei" with 
the proportion received by Jim Boy out of the money paid by Watson and 
others, is a fair e(]uivalent for the lands in said towti, in tiie way that Indian 
lands have usually sold." and says he is also well acquainted witli their 
quality ; and George Clough testifies that he estimates the lands, tlie title 
to which hail been tlie subject of investigation, "to be worth twD hundred 
thousand dollars." How many of the first class may be awarded to memo- 
rialists who now setup claim to tliem, or what the relative «piality «d' those 
which shall be shown to belong to individual purciiasers from Indians, com- 
])are(l with those that may fall to the vendees nndei* this contract, no man 
can now know ; and how far the sum mentioned by Mr. Clough shall be 
reduced by <lecrees to prior |)Ui*cliasers, wIkj are now asking them at the 
hands of the commis^-ioners. it is impossible even to conjecture. The con- 
dition of thiiiirs on the iStii of August is the cruide. The whole district, 
which is the subject of contract, is one scene of apparent!}', atul perhaps 
really, inextricable confusion. Dilliculties of magnitude meet you on every 
hand. He who enters into the conflict as the champion of eithei* entire 
side of the ipiestion, must do it at great expense u{' time, money, andcom- 
lort. and reap an uncertain harvest. I am aware tliat it has been decided, 
and often too, "that the hazard run by a buyer of losing what he advances 
on some contingency, does not prevent courts from giving relief;" and the 
peilect involution that enwraps the title to these lands is stated, not as an 
obstacle to the just operation of gross inadequacy, if it exist, but as an in- 



[ Doc. No. 274. ] 27 

gredient that deserves to be weighed in fixing the price, and as evidence 
that the consideration was not st> palpably inadequate as at first blush 
it niigiit socin to be. All the cii'cumstances that surround the parties, and 
the subject of their negotiation, must be carefully looked at : and surely no 
prudent nian would give the full value for land, tlie ownership of wiiich 
would at otice lead him into several hundred controversies ; few would en- 
gage in them at all. I an> of opinion, therefore, that, although the consid- 
erntion is not ecpjivalent to the value of the lands tliat the purchasers may, 
and probably will, acquire under this contract, it is not so glaringly dis- 
l)roj)()rtione(l as, standing alone, to afford legal grounds for setting aside 
the agreement. Are other considerations adduced, wliich will, in connexion 
with the inequality, raise the legal presumption of fraud ? The incidents 
usually relied on. and often successfully, in courts, to strengthen the ar- 
gument of inadequacy, are, that the one party was ignorant, weak, or 
in a distressed and necessitous situation, and tliat the other took an undue 
advantiige tlierettf. The Indians were sufficiently uninformed, simple, a»id 
embarrassed ; but their condition was a |)eculiar one. They were undes- 
the immediate guai-dianship and protection of a United States officer of el- 
evated ratik ; the negotiation was conducted oji their behalf by a legal 
gentleman of high character appointed for that particular purpose ; and 
they were diffVM'ently situated from those parties who have been usually liti- 
gant before ordinary tribunals, in the special j)rotecl!on thus extended to 
them. Mr. Clougli testifies that " a pvoposit^orj was made to the chiefs to 
take all the disputed lands in McHenry's district at valuation. Opothe 
Yoholo said he was willing to accede to the proposition ; and an agreement 
was made to meet tlie same evening i?i Tallassee to confirm the agreement, 
but the chiefs did not meet. Deponent says that he made aimther proposi- 
tion to the chiefs to take the land in a body at $150,000 ;" and again, that 
these |)ropositi()ns "were made a few days before the contract of Watson, 
Haniick, and others, was made." Witness, on ais cross-examination, sta- 
ted further, that "he and his comjjany would give them one hundred and 
fifty thousand dollars for the lands above referred to;" tliat the company 
consisted '• of himself, his brother, O.K.Freem.an, Mr.Samuel K. Hodges, 
and Colonel Seaborn Jones; and that he was in Tallassee on the 28th day 
of August, and understood a negotiation was going on for making a con- 
tract fertile land ; but he did imt make his jiroposition to General Jesup, 
or Colonel Campbell." This appears to be relied on; but it cannot escape 
notice, that, with the single exception of one chief of one town, it does not 
appear to whom these propositions were made — whether to tlie chiefs who 
signed the contract, or to all the chiefs who rule in Dr. McHenry's district. 
And to how many of one or the other description is unknown ; unless, in- 
deed, the testimony should lead to the jirobable conclusion, that the commu- 
nication was made to Opothe Yolinlo alone, through whom it was expected 
to i-cach others. Be tliis as it may, an isolated proposal, containing alter- 
native terms, or even two distinct pi-opositions, made in the loose and ir- 
legnlar manner mentioned, to persons that the witness must be presumed 
to know could not consummate a contract, cannot weigh much. What 
was the motive of Opothe Yoholo for not acting on the suggestions of the 
witness, we know not; certain it is, that for some reason they were disre- 
garded. But it is remarkable, that an intention of making a purchase of 
such magnitude and extent should not have been communicated to General 
Jesup, or Colonel Campbell, by an individual who was at the place where, 



28 [ Doc. No. 274. J 

and cngnizantof tlic fact, lliat a negotiation was in progress for the pur- 
chase ol {\w lands lliat lie ami his cdMipatiy sought to possess. \N'('i"e these 
proposiliiMis, or i'illi('i-<if them, mentioned to anvhody at Talhisscc on Iho 
28th August ? I infer not; from the fact that Captain I'age, who was 
present, and, from his acipiaintance and intercourse witii the Creeks, wouhl 
he likely to hear from some quarter of such a movement, if made, de- 
poses lliat he knew •• of no oflVr heing made to General Jesup, or to the 
Indians, for a larger sum than tlie one named in the contract.*' Did Gen- 
eral Wat-^on and liis co-purchasers know of the proposals, or any otlier, 
and use in>|)ri)j)er inlluejice o\er the sellers? I have seen no evidence tliat 
would warrant me to say so; nor do I perceive that additional force is 
giverj to tiie allegation of inecjuality of price, hy any consideration that 1 
have been able to bestow on the testimony of Mr. Clough. I have not ad- 
verted to the distinction sometimes taken between contracts executory and 
executed, because the result of my rellections rendered it unnecessary ; if, 
indeed, it could have been important in any view of a contract which is 
sui generis. Tlie shape that this brau( h of the incpiiry has assumed likens 
it to applications to open the biddings at public sales, (»r auctions, which 
modern decisions discoui-age as dangerous ground of judicial action, un- 
less coming within the great and salutary principles before mentioned, and 
well established. I cannot advise the rejection of this contract (ui the 
score of inadequacy of consideration, taken singly, or in combination with 
any facts in proof. • 

Tlie following (piestions remain h hind : 

1. ^^ as Genci;il Jesup authorized to make such agieemcnt ? 

2. Can the agreement, on any ccmstruction.be extended beyond the towns 
whose chiefs signed it; and could they transfer the half sections of the 
members even of their own respective tribes ? 

3. Is the contract sustainable under the treaty ? 

4. Was it performed according to its own provisions? 

The instructions to General Jesup, so far as the subject under consider- 
ation is involved, are contained in a comnuinication to that ollicer from the 
War Department, of the 19th May last. They follow : "Tlie President 
has been desirous of ascertaining what frauds have been committed upon 
the Indians, in the sale of their lands, with a view to remedy the evil as 
far as possible. I5ut this effort, a succinct account of which will be com- 
municated to you by the Cominissi<»ner of Indian Affairs, has been now 
stopj)ed by war. It is still, however, desii-able that the friendly part of 
the Creeks, (if, in fact, any of them should remain friendly,) slmuld be 
relieved from the cmbarrassujents under whicli they have labored with re- 
spect to their lands. 1 enchtsc the cojiy of a letter from Captain Page, by 
whicli you will perceive the views of that ofticer on the subject, and the 
proposition made by the U j)per Creeks. This proposition has been ap- 
proved, and Captain Page advised of the fact. So far, therefore, as any 
part of this division of the Creeks shall remain jieaceahle, you are au- 
thorized to sanction the proceedings recommended. IJut whatever is done, 
must be done without delay ; for it is very imjjortant lljat these people 
should be immediately sent off. You will assure lliem that the Government 
is anxious t<» do tliem justice ; and that the claims fif those who remain at 
peace, and remove to the country west of the Mississippi, will be duly 
attended to. A descriptixe roll of all these persons will be taken, in order 
to determine their cases hcrcalter. It is iinpt)ssible, IVom the want of lime, 



[ Doc. No. 274. ] 29 

1o cause abstiacts to be prepared, showing the sales that have been made 
by the Creek Indians; and, fheret'ore, no decisions can be given for any 
definite ])roceedings upon tliat subject. There is no objection, however, 
in the cases of these friendly Indians, to permit them to sell agreeably to 
the established regulations (a copy of wiiich you will herewith receive) if 
the purchaser can satisfy himself that no contract has been heietofore made 
for the sale of the land. Butif this is dotie, he must do it upon his own re- 
sponsibility; foi'ifa j)revious valid contract has been entei-ed into, the first 
purchaser must hold the land. If the airangement stated by Captain 
Page should take effect, you are authorized to select a competent otHcer, 
should the Indians desire it, to see that justice is done; and also to apj)oint 
rt cej-tifying agent to certify contracts, should any be entered into, as above 
mentioned; his duties and compensation will be governed by the prescribed 
regulations. 

'•If, however,ihesc matters cannot be satisfactoi-ily arranged, j)i'evious to 
the departure of the Indians, you will assure the friendly-disposed part of 
them tiiat measures will be taken as early as j)racticable, to see that jsistice 
is done to them, and that the land shall bedis})osed of at its fair value, and 
the proceeds paid over to them." 

it is manifest that, if the reservations must be disj)osed of before the 
Indians removed west, two coui-ses, and two only, were within the scope of 
the General's powers: one requires of him an observance of the rules and 
regulations which had been prescribed by the Government, to conti-ol 
Indian sales of i-eservations, and to whicli the services of a certifying agent 
were necessary ; the other enjoined uj)on him the adoption of the plan 
suggested in Captain Page's letter. If neither of these lines of conduct 
were regartled, but he marked out a different path for himself, and 
walked upon it, the conclusion seems to follow, that, how sifigle and 
]»atriotic soever his motives, he misjudged and transcended his authority. 
That the rules imposed upon agents, in the ordinary mode of transferring 
Indian reservations, were not observed in executing or jierfurming 
the contract of 28th August, is quite sure. Whetiier the j)lan communica- 
ted by thechief to Captain Page, and by his letter of 9th May transmitted 
to the Secretai-y of War, was carr-ied out by this proceeding, is now to be 
ascertained. 

What was the pfOj)osition detailed in that letter ? In a talk held by the 
captain with the U{»))er Creeks, OpntheYoholo, a leadingcbief of the Tucka- 
bachee town, said, "I have come on one plan, which I wish to adopt, and 
be off imjnediately ; which is this : A company of gentleuien liave seen 
nearly all the conij)anies who purchased our lands, and they have agreed 
to I'aise a sum of money equivalent to the value of the lands we claim to 
have been defrau<led of. Tliey proj)ose to pay us in this v\ay, for instance: 
I will call all tiie persons in my town together, whose lands have been 
taken by peisonating, or other frauds practised on them : and the j)ur- 
chaser or his agent, being present, in the presence of the two piiiu'ipal 
chiefs of each town, and an agent (if the United States, sliall pay to tlie i-ight.- 
ful holder of the land a sum of mr)ney to his and the chiefs* ftill satisfaction ; 
and in case the parties cannot agree, two i-esj)ectable a3id disinter-ested 
white men shall (one by tlie chiefs, and one by the purchaser) be selected 
to value the land and the ainonnt of their valuation, under oath, shall be 
paid. 'I'he receipt of the money, and theacknowledginent of satisfaction by 
the Indian, shall be certified to by an agent of the United States and the 



30 [ Doc. No. 274. ] 

chiefs of titp town ; ami tlic title to he pcrl'ccttMl in the name of the pmcliaser, 
wiitten (til tlii'liKC ortlic lir-sl (it ed. passed iiiand (crtincd to liy any ol'tlic 
ci'ililying agenls. wtietlier the I'residi-nt may liave. levci-sed and made void 
tli«-. deeds a|iprov(cl or not approved, and, consequently, tlie land and 
llie titles belong t(» the original purchaser', before either u\ the certirying 
agents, 'llie cliii-fs id" cacli town are well ac<|nainled, and know well the 
frands, and the injured persons j and in this way we can settle all our dilli- 
culties, and relicvi^ the Go\ernini'nt «d' all further trouble with us. He 
then asked me il 1 could not be jnesent and witness these payments. I told 
him, if he was det»'rmined to adopt the plan, 1 would: if I could not be there 
all the time. Lieutenant Deas, Doctor Randall, or Mr. Somerville, wouhl 
answei' in my absence.'* The foregoing, in connexion with a communica- 
Uon from the Commissioner of Indian Alfairs of 2(Jlh May, leciting what 
had been done in the Cieek country by the agents wiio had visited it, and 
the rules under whi(li they aited, contain, so fai" as I am aware, the cntiic 
instmctions of (ieneral Jesup on the sultject, and the j».)wers delegated. 
Were the Indians of the towns called together, and the rightful holder of lite 
land paid a sum with which he was content, or, according to a valuation 
on oath, in the j)reserice (d' two piincipal chiefs and a United States agent? 
Were receipts givi-n by the Indians, and the titles perfected in the manner 
proposed ? N\ eiethe wronged Ci-eeks identified, with a view to have their 
itijuries redressed? In what feature <loes the contract in cpiestion resemble 
the plan of Opoihe Yoliohir I cannot |»erceive. The genei-al, in his letter 
ol 30th August, announcing the conti'act to the Uepartn.ent of War, re- 
niaiks: •• I felt much doubt as to the propriety of such an arrangement, av. 
well as the power of entering into it ; considei-ing, as I did, that eacli 
individual Indian had a vested right in his particular location." The 
openness of this avowal is highly creditable to him, and makes the duty of 
saying that these doubts were well founded less j)aiiiful. No discretion, 
beyond what has becti mentioned, was confidetl ; for it is \ery clear that 
the Government contemplated Indian r-ennval as a probable e\ent, prior to 
any clisposition of these lands. The Secretary, iH the foregoing letter- of 
19th May. says, " It is very imjxirtant that these people should be immc- 
diutely sent i>ff. You will assure them that the Governinent is anxious to 
do them jirstice, and that the claims of those who remain at peace, and re- 
move to the iountry ivest of the Jlississippi, yviU be dvlij attended to. A 
descr'i|»tive roll of all these pervsons will be taken, in order to determine 
iheir cases hereafter :^^ and again. '* if. however, these matters canuot be 
satisfactorily arranged," (i-eferring to the j)lan indicated by CajMain I'age,) 
•» previous to the departure (»f the Indians, you will assure the friendly- 
disposed part (d' them that measures will be taken as early as practical)le 
to see that Justice is<lonc to them, ami that the land sliall be disposed (fat its 
fair value, and the proceeds paid over to them.'* No view, however liberal, 
of the authority with which General Jesup wasclollied. warr-ants thea^iee- 
inent of the 28th August ; and I am constrained to say that it is, for that 
reason, in my jiulgu.ent, an invalid transaction. 

Can the contract, (e.xcluding the operationof the statute of frauds) on any 
construe tion, be extended beycnid Tuckabatchee and Thiobthlocco towrrs; 
andean the communities in them be held to the agreement, on tin; pr'inciphr 
td representation of tlnir chiefs as chiefs, or- by \ir-tue of any s|ic( iai ;iu- 
ihority bestowed fur* the occasion, or- b) subsecjuent r-ecognition ? There is no 
lunger any Creek nation east of the Mississippi, nor was there any in 



[ Doc. No. 274. ] 31 

August last. There was not then any chief of the Creek nation, wliose 
(Joniiuion was as wide as the circle of all tlie Creek communities. The 
treaty of 1832 ended their national existence, anti broke into distinct and 
sepai-ate j)arcels wliat had before been common and undivided. From tliat 
time fortii, their customs, usages, and laws were abandoned and proscribed 
by themselves, and by the State of Alabama, wliich, in tlie same yeai", provi- 
ded by law that " all laws, usages, and custonjs, now used, enjoyed, or 
practised by tlie Ci-eek and Cherokee nations of Indians, within the lim- 
its of this State, conti-ary tw the constitution and laws of this State, are 
hereby abolished. If any Indian or Indians shall meet in any council, 
assembly, or convention, and there make any law foi- said tribe, contrary 
to the laws and constitution of this State, such Indian or' Indians shall, upon 
conviction, be imprisoned in tlie common jail of (he proper county, not 
less than two, nor moi-e tliaii four months." The nation, as such, had not 
only no rights of proj)erty west of the Cliattahoochce since 1832, but, what- 
ever system of policy had theretofor-e prevailed among them, regulating 
either the exercise of powei- by the headmen, or the intercourse of in- 
dividuals, was uprooted and jn-osirated. If a chief or «)thers, as their 
usage miglit be, presumed to take away the life of a homicide, he or tiiey 
were liable to be prosecuted for murder. If any summary modes of 
redi-ess presci'ibed formerly by their customs, foi" injui-ies to person or 
jiroperty, were i-esorted to, the actors were amenable to the laws of the 
State. In no country does the power of cession of land pertain to the 
ruler, except in i-espect of national domain. Private property may in all 
be taken for public use, more or less summai'ily, according to the form of 
goveriunent, upon making compensation for it ; but that priuciple lias no 
application to this case. Prior to the tieaty, the chiefs unquestionably had 
the power to cede the lands of their tribe or nation, and all our Govern- 
ment compacts witli them derived their validity from such authority. But 
even then, one or two ti-ibes could not cede by their chiefs any part of the 
public domain ; for it was national, and it is understood to have been their 
practice to precede any such act by a meeting of the towns in general 
council, and the giving of common consent to the impoi-tant steji about to 
be taken. A new state of things has ai-isen since 1832. What was be- 
fore common })roperty, became individual and private estate. There is no 
more any national domain, nor does there exist any town estate. The 
bond which held them together as one whole on this side of the Missis- 
sijipi, is cut ; and they have fallen away into small separate communities, 
having no interest, nor any thing else, in general, except their color, their 
misfortunes, and theii' savage habits. There ar-e. or* were in August, in 
Dr. McHenry's district, forty-one chiefs, who, as Maj.T. J. Abbott testifies 
are e([ual in grade and rank, and, as far as he knows, in j)oint of authority. 
Of these, the chiefs of but two towns (excluding the Tallassee chief) signed 
the c(mtract. They had, it is obvious, I think, no general official power 
to bind the fouiteen towns which did not acknowledge their rule. That 
they iiad no special power is already shown, and, in ad<lifion, is proved by 
Colonel Campbell's statement transmitted to the commissioners, and 
herewith sent. On page 8, he says "The authority of the chiefs to 
make the sale can hardly be doubted. I speak not of authority derived from 
eacli Indian. This was not to be expected. The offer of the Goveri nc nt 
in 1 833 did not contemplate this. The chiefs stand in the place of represen- 
tatives for their towns. They transact all business for them. They 



32 I Doc. No. 274 J 

represent tlirm in roimrils:" and apjain, on paj^c 13, " They were required 
in CDjistilt their yroplc. Tlicy wt* nt oil" for tlii' purpose, and declared that their 
consent was nbtained." Thcst' statements, by (he s;<Mjtlema!i who condurt- 
ed tlip negotiation on IM-Iiall" of tlie liidiaiis, are conclusive, in the j)articu- 
lar tuidei* review. It seems to tne impossible to donbt on the siiijject. The 
chiefs, itj consultation with him, did not even profess to act for any t«)wns 
but their mrn, and were not required, imr diil they, confer with any j)eople 
bnt t/ieir own ; and aniUl not, upon any j)iin( iple that presents itself to 
niv mind, ctmtract an obligation that would extend beyond their orvn 
towns (ind people. Had they the [)ower to hind them ? It has been shown 
that the contracting cliiefs liad no standing authority for such purj)r)se. 
Were tliey s|)ecially clothed with any ? Much remaik has been already 
indulged on this subject whei-e itseemed applicable, and will Hot be repeated. 
There is testimony going to show that Jim IJoy repudiated his own ^cts. 
His declarations made in the absence of the purchasers, and after the exe- 
cution of the j'ontract, catuiot legally be admitted on behalf of the coun- 
ter-memoi"ialists to ini|)Mgn his own covenants ; but the testimony of Cap- 
tain Page and (ieneral Woodward, proihiced by the memorialists, is con>- 
peteiit evidence, and proves that this chief, in woi-dsaml comluct. admitted 
lie had not the assent «)f liis peo|)le at the time of contracting. The agree- 
ment itself shows that tu) such assent had been obtained by the cliiefs, 
notwithstanding their lepresentations to the contrary; for it provides for 
dissent, and there is an entii-e absence of evidence establishing consent or 
ainhority, as regards all the tribes, at any time preceding the execution of 
the agreement, which it was iiicumbent on the menH)rialists to pj-ove. 
Sullicient has been already said of what followed the £8th August, in 
j'ogard of assent; and I forbear to make any remark as to Tusconer 
Hadjo, chief of the Fishpond town, who signed the receipt for one-half of 
the purchase money, but was no party to the cmitract. The agreement, in 
this aspect, I i-egard to have been made without authoi-ity; to be without 
even the weak sanction that adoption migiit be supposed to give; and void, 
asi'es|iects all pei'sons but those whose names are attixed to it. 

Does it sta»id in a more fortunate attitmle in reference to the treaty ? 
By the second article of this instrument, " ninety i)rincipal chiefs of the 
Creek tribe 'are allowed* to select one section each, and every othei* head 
of a Creek family to select one-half section each; which tracts shall be 
reserved for sale, for tlieir use. foi-the term of five years, unless sooner dis- 
posed of by tliem." The third aiticle provides that •» these tracts may be 
conveyetl bif the persons selecting the same, to any other persons, for a fair 
ccjusideralion. in sucii manner as the ['resident may direct. 'I'.'ie con- 
tract shall be certified by some person appointed for that purpr>se by the 
President, hut shall not be vali<l till the President apjiroves the same. 
A title shall be given by the United States on the completion of the pay- 
ment." And by ariicle 4tii, "at the end of five }ears, all the Creeks 
entitled to these sections, ami desirous of remaining, shall leceive j)atent3 
therei(»r in fee-simple." Much of what might be regarded as belonging to 
this t.ipic has been antiripated ; hut it may be observed, that the treaty is 
tin' supreme law of the land, and prescribes certain forms of proceerling, 
which cajMiot be passed by. The Indians might, assuredly, by a full and 
inteili"-ent consent given by (ill C(mc.erned, vary or dispose with these 
])rovish)ns ; but it is iielieved they have not done so by such an act as the 
occasion required. In conformity with this treaty, the President pre- 



[ Doc. No. 274. J 33 

scribed rertaiti rules and regulations for tlie government of the agents 
employed under it, wliicii wenr to tiie idcni\ficatiun of the individual reser- 
vee, a fair valnntion of his land, and t!»e achial payment of the full 
equivalent into his o'lcn hands, before his estjite should be divested. The 
policy of the general administration, for years, has been wisely and 
huinaneiy (iirected to securing individual Indian rights; and the annui- 
ties have been understood to be distributed on that foot, so as to prevent 
the chiefs iVom defrauding their enslaved and besotte<! people. But, in this 
instance, the rights of tiie reservees stand upon a broader and firmer basis 
than any usage or instruction. They are secured by ti-eaty — the highest 
of all obligations. Its every pi'ovision looks to that security ; and the 
articles cited — inserted fur the exj>ress purpose of preserving personal 
j-igliLs — seem to be most inconsistent with the contract, which sweeps them 
off at one brush, and does not conform to the regulations laid down by the 
President, by which General Jesup was to be governed, except in the 
single event that tlie plan communicated by Cajjtain i'age could not be 
carried out, from w hich this contract is a wide depaiture. It has been 
further established, as the true construction of the treaty, that when a 
contract by an Indian reservee has been certified to the President by an 
agent, his act of approval or rejection can alone dispose of such certifi- 
cate. Every tract of land included in the agreement of August 28 has 
been so certifieil, and has not yet been finally acted on by tlie Chief Magis- 
trate, because of defects in the report njade by the agent. Will not this 
construction of the treaty, and the correct one, be invaded by a confirma- 
tion of this contract ? It has been strongly pressed in argument upon the 
commissioners, that the United States, holding the legal title, can control 
the manner of disposition. This is certainly so ; but it seems to have been 
overlooked that it is a power of control restricted by the terms of the 
treaty; that the power of 'the United States is merely an<l purely directory 
and aj)prol)atory ; that the Indian must be the active and moving agent, as 
he ought to be, in selling what is substantialiy his own : and tiiat the Gov- 
ej-nment has exercised this power in the manner deemed best calculated to 
give efft'ct to the treaty, and security to the private i-ight under it. 

Every agreement, to give it efficacy against one party, should be faith- 
fully and fully comjilied with by the other. The tliird restriction of the 
contract provides " that the money hereafter stijiulated to be paid shall be 
paid to the Indian entitled to the land in presence of the chiefs and an officer 
of the United States ; and, until such payment be made, it shall be deposit- 
ed with the certifying agents of this district : the payment of which shall be 
a consummation of this contract." The fourth restriction stipulates that 
any Indian may dissent from the comjiact ; which must, however, be ex- 
pressed before its consummation. That consummation was to be effected 
by the payment — to wliom ? Certainly to the reservee, and in the mode 
prescribed in the third restriction. What other opportunity had he. or was 
it possible for him to have, to ex|)iess liis dissent, but the one which an of- 
fer to pay him the money would present ? And yet this sole chance f>f pro- 
testing against the infraction of his rights is cut off and taken away, al- 
most in the same breath that told him it ws^s secured. It is reuiarkable 
that these provisions were no sooner made than disregarded. Tliey would 
seem to have been inserled with a vi(;w to the treaty, and the regulations 
undei- it ; but the next day the result shows the money to have bi-en paid, 
not to the Indians entitled to the land, but to the chiefs. Where it is now, 



34 f Doc. Xo. 274. ] 

is unkudwn; but General VtOodw aid's rUposition proves (Iiat at least one 
tliiel', Jim Bov, retains the jjidpottioii ol' his town, and lias rai'iitMl it willi 
liini to Florida, wliere lie and ii are sidjject to tlie \icissitu(les of war. By 
what ainli()rit> tliis course was taken, i am at a loss todiscoM-f. 'V\n^ reason 
Colonel L anijibcll I'lirnishes in his statement alieady relened to, page 9 : 
♦» the money IS stii»nlated to be paid to eacii rcservee," This pi'o\isi(ni 
was not earned into eilect, but the alteration was made by the agents of 
the Uniteil States and the Indians. \\ lits lor thousands of dollars were in 
the hands ofsherin's and constables. To place i.ioney in the hand.-j of the 
Indian^, would be to opi-n tlie door lor' oppression and iiijusticc; I'oi- both of 
which the circumstances of the case permitted noiemedy. 'J'he money 
was thereloie paid to the chief, lor the use of his people. The puichaseis 
were n<it a party to, nor consenting to, this ; it was determined on as best 
foi- the Indians. 'I'hc same prudential i-egard for Indiati interest would 
liave justified the United Stales in receiving the pnce <»f every selectii>n ir> 
the Cieek counlrv ; lor it is to be lamented that in almost every instance 
they wasted or were (iefrauded of their funds. But such a course wiiuld 
have been as unjustifiable as the payment of the money to the chirfs (fti 
this contract was a palpable departure from it, in the most material stip- 
ulations lor individuals it contained: although thepui-chasersare not charge- 
able with this, (and, standing alone, it would not, for that reason, be good 
cause for setting aside the contract,) it comes strongly in aid of the o:hcr 
grounds which have been laid for that course. 

Finall}, it has been zealously urged that the existing circumstances in 
'• the nation "justified and sanctioned the measure adojited. It is certain 
that they were peculiar, and that the gentleman in command heie was in 
a most dillicult |)osition. The Indians had been waging war against our 
fellow-citizens, destroying their lives and j)ro|)erty. This community was 
much and justly excited, ami the removal of tlie Indians indispensable. 
That General Jesup should have yielded to the necessity that seemed to 
exist for taking this, or some kindicd step, (and notiiingless than which, 
he inlorms the Government, would have induced him "under any circum- 
stances to have sanctioned it,'') is not lemarkable. But, with the purest 
motives, the best men may err ; although there was an impeiious neces- 
sity for renn)ving the Indians, there was no such necessity for selling their 
land ; and the Secretary of War, as alieady observed, in the letter of I9th 
May, contemplated their i-emoval and the dis|)osition of their lands subse- 
quently. Wliat advantage have these reservees (hiived from the sale ? 
SVho lias pi'o\t'd that a solitai-y Indian "entitled to the land ''has received 
one dollar of the thirty-seven thousand and live hundred dollars paid ? 
Besides, and over and above all these consideration'^, this isa(]uestion not 
of expeditncy, but of right. 

The c(jntract of 28tli August, being ojiposed by the statute of frauds of 
Alabama — as it was made, without autliority either in Gener'al Jesup or 
the Indian chiefs, is contiary to the treaty, and does not c(nisist w itii either 
its Idler oi- spir-it, and w;«s not pei foj-nn-d according even to its ow ji |)ro- 
Yisions — it is not, in my ojiinion, entitled to the ratificalion of the I'lesident 
of the United States. 

There remains only one other siihjert of brief ri'inark. upon w hich, though 
it may be thought gratuitous, I will \enture. Tlie purchasers ha\e paid 
thirty-seven thousand and live hundred dollais, fail ly and honestly, on a 
contract executed under the direction of United Slates ollicers, \\lio were 



[ Doc. No. 274. J 35 

actuated by the most laudable motives. The jjayment was made under the 
fullest coMvictioii thai the couipact would be ratified, wiiich General Watsoti 
and tlidse associatt (I with him liad reason to rely on. A great object has 
been gained by the United States, atid the citizens thereof resident in Al- 
abama and Georgia ; and although there was, in my estimation, an error 
of judgment in the supijosition that this measure was necessary to its at- 
tainment, it was undoubtedly one of the levei-s by which the Creeks were 
removed west. Peace, quiet, and security, are restoi-ed to this lately 
disturbed region; and to whatever extent tl;e arrangement in (iuestion may 
have opej-ated in procuring tiiis happy change, its contribution of aid would 
be cheaply jjui-chased by the United States in I'efunding the above sum to 
the venders. Indeed, if a pecuniary standard is resorted to, and the calcu- 
lations of the financier are substituted for the loftier sentiments of the pat- 
riot, it will be found that the cessation of the expenditures incident to the 
j)rescnce of the Indians, for four ilays only, retained in the treasury a 
larger susn than has been paid on the contract. But the more <xj)anded 
view is the better one. 'I'he purchasers had an undoubted right to be- 
come parties to the contract; it was fairly, however illegally, made. Tl;e 
money which they paid has been, in all human jjrobability, scattered to 
the winds, and cannot be returned by the Indian chiefs ; and if the Pres- 
ident should approve of the views put forth in this opinion, and set aside 
the contract, tiiose wlm entered into it should, I think, be reimbursed by 
the United States the sum exj)ended on the faith of that instrument ; fur 
which, in the event supposed, 1 trust provision will be made by the Legis- 
lature of the Union. 

I have the honor to be, with the hiirhest respect, your obedient servant, 

" T. HARTLEY CRAWFORD. 

lion. B. F. Butler, 

Secretartj of ff'ar. 



OPINION. 



Several questions arise out of the case which is made here, by the par- 
ties to the foregoing contract of the 28th August, 1836, and those oj)po.se(l 
to its confirmation, which require careful examination and grave consid- 
eration. The |)roperty attempted to be conveyed by that contract is of 
great value. It may be supposed that the i)arties claiming it feci an in- 
tense interest concerning the result of the pending controversy. Upon 
every principle they are entitled to be fully and fairly heard. 

A preliminary inquiry is indispensable to a fisll comprehension of the 
legal principles involved in this case. 

"what kind of an estate does a Creek Indian reservee hold in his reserve, 
under the provisions of the treaty of March, 1832 ? 

It certainly is not an estate for years, nor an estate at will, nor an estate 
by sufferance. 

It is not a conditional fee ; for such a fee, at the common law, was a fee 
restrained to some particular heirs, exclusive of others — as to the heirs of 
a man's body ; by which only his lineal descendants were admitlec!, in ex- 
clusion of collatej'al heirs. 



36 [ Doc. No. 274. ] 

Accnnlirig to tlie common law, their a?-e limited fees or such estates of 
iiiliiiilance as are clogged or coufnied with coiiditiotis or qiiaiilirations. 
Tiii^ estate i s a Lee, because, bv jwssibHilij, it may endure lorcver in a man 
and his heirs ; yet, as that duration depends upon the coucui-rence of 
(Collateral circumstances which (pialify the puiity <jf the donation, it is 
tbi'J^'ii'JlL a (jua lifi c<nee. 

Hut it is not so material to settle the tcclmicnl dennition wliich should be 
gi\en of the estate which a Creek Indian holds in liis reserve. 

J would say that the treaty of the 24lh Match. 1832. has vested in him 
n frcihuld, so long as he remains upon or holds the control of his reseive : 
and tliat, if he iiolds his conti-ol for five years, he is clearly entitled to a 
tilh' in fee simjde — to a patent to be issued by the (iovertmient, conveying 
to him, his heiivs and assigns, forever ; thereby making the Indian the tenant 
in fee simple, oi- lathei- tlu- tenant in fee. 

'J he leserve of an Indian is his ieucmtut — a woicl <»f so extensive import 
as to cover the estate or intei.est (whatever it may be) held by the reservee. 
Each reseivce has in his reserve a substantial abiding interest in the soil ; 
the nnim-umbered use of it is secured to him by a solemn treaty, and 
the United States are jjlcdged to protect him in the peaceable and lawful 
cultivati<Mi of it. 

It is asked by the memorialists that cei-tain Creek reservees, by virtuir 
of the contract of the !£8lh of August, shall be divested of llair qualified 
ftes — their tenements in the lands reserved to them by tiie said treaty of 
the -2At\\ (jf March, 1832. 

Tlie contract for the sale <»f these reserves is in writing ; it is signed 
by six Indian chiefs, in behalf t)f about six hui.dred ami tiliy reservees, 
who had given no authoiity in wriliii^ to these chiefs to make the same. 

1 he (juestion made on this part of the case is. Can an auihority be 
communicated by one man to anothei-, by parol, to contract for the sale of 
his leal estate l.^ing in the State of Alabama, where the 4th section of the 
statute oc frauds and perjuries of the 29lh Car. II, cliap. 3, is in full 
force. 

The Legislature of this State has declared "that no action shall be 
brought to charge any person ui)un any contract for the sale of lands, 
tenements, or hereditaments, unless the promise or agreement upon whicli 
such action shall be brouglit, or some memorandum or note theieof, shall 
be in writing, and signed by tlie party to be charged therewith, or by some 
other person by him thereunto lawlully authorized." 

It will be seen that the language em[)loyed iti the statute is simply "by 
him thereunto lawfully authorized." 

In tiie 1st and 3d clauses of the statute which relate to leases, &c., and 
wilif li are in force in England, the words arc "by him ther-eunto lawfully 
authorized in writing.'' 

An agf'nt in England who executes such leases, &c., must be author- 
ized in writing. 

I'his riuestion has been well settled both in Englaml and the United 
Sfa'es. In 9lh Ves., Lord Kidon <leclares that an agent need not be au- 
thor iztrl in writing. See also istSch. and Leiroy, 28; 2d Taunton, 38; 
nth Massachusetts, 27 and 97 ; 1st Yeates, 23 : and 13lli Johnson, 297. 

Fidin tlie forTgoing casi's. and marry others, it ajrpears that an agerrt may 
uign a contract for the t>ale or purchase ui' lands, without authority in wri- 






[ Doc. No. 274. ] 37 

ting from his principal ;an(l that the principal will be required to complete 
sticli sale or pm-chase by all necessary conveyances, although he may 
j)Iea(l the statute of frauds and perjuries to any prayer for a decree against 
him. 

But it may be alleged that the estate conceded by tiie treaty of 1832 
to arj Indian, is not such an estate as is covered by tlie statute of 29 Car. 
II, chap. 3, sec. 4. 

In deciding this question, we may inquire, What interests in land arc 
covered by this statute, according to the decisions in England and our 
own country ? 

Whatever interests would be protected in that country and in other 
States of the Union, would, it is jjresumed, be protected by the decisions of 
the courts of Alabama. At least, the judges here would regard the adju- 
dications upon this statute of frauds, of otlicr courts distingulslicd for 
talents and learning, with profound respect. 

It has been decided in England, that a share in the New rivei* is pro- 
tected by the statute of frauds, 2 Peere Williams, 127. Tiie operati-m of 
the statute is extended over shares in canal navigation, and in general to 
all descriptions of tolls. 

The word tenement is used in the statute — a term of the broadest im- 
port. A contract for rents issuing from lands is protected by the statute, 
2d Ves. Jr. 232 : likewise whatevei* savors of the reality, when it be- 
comes the subject of contract. The 4tij clause of the statute contemplates 
not only a ti-ansfer of the fee in the soil, but some Interest therein. (Sec 
4th Jolmson'sRep. 81 ; 7th do. 205 ; 14th do. 358 ; 15th do. 200; l5tiido. 
503 : 1st Johnson's Ch. Rep. 131 ; 1st Munford, 510; 7th Cranch, 177 ; 
6th Wheaton, 577; 17th Massa. 571 ; 13th do. 309; 1st Hen. and Mun- 
foi'd, 91. 

But if it be admitted, as it is, that these chiefs might lawfully contract 
foi' the sale of these reserves under an authority communicated by jjarol ; 
stil! it is indispensable that this authority and its extent shall be establish- 
ed by the clearest and most indisputable testimony. 

It may be proved by oral testimony. This follows, of necessity, from the 
doctrine that the power with which the agent is clothed need not be com- 
municated by writing. A will not be permitted to set liimself up, pre- 
sumptuously, as the agent of B, and contract for the sale of B's real es- 
tate, liis tenement, the residence of himself and his family. It must be 
j)roved that A was authorized to assume the character of agent, and that 
he acted within the scope of his authority. 

In tiie case un(U;r consideration, where is the j)roof that tlie six hundred 
and fifty reservees owning the reserves marked in Hogan's l>ook for re- 
versal, ever authorized Tuckabatchee Micco and his associates to contract 
for the sale of their interest in their reserves ? 

Where is the proof that they ever assented to the contract, which was 
made after the preliminaries were agreed on, and before the contract was 
reduced to vvritins: ? 

There wei'e Indians at the place where the conti-act was written and 
signed. But were they the Indians who had been shamefully defraud- 
ed by "personation ?" or were they the reservees, who had not been 
cheated, who had sold for a fair consideration, and iiad receive/1 the same ? 
We are not told any thing on this most material part ot this case. 



38 [ Doc. No. 274. ] 

Wc are not called on to consider \\\c natiitc of the contract of tlie 28(h 
August. 'I'liat instrinni-nt i-: not a nu-re rofjtrart or inenioi'andinn in wri- 
ting Uu- a sail" of the reserves. Snrh a conliact is hiruling, altliongli the 
agent acts undt-r parol authority. 

IJut, it an interest it: the land is intended to he pa-sed hy the insti-nment 
(Xecnt.-d. then the authority to coMttHCl and transl'i-r vivst he in writing. 
In the (h'cd of the 28th August, all the right, title, interest, and claim of 
the reserxees in and to six hnmlred and fifiy reserves marked for reversal 
in llogan's hook, is transferred ami conveyed to the niemnrialists, (N\ at- 
son and others.) This the chiefs hail no authority to do, on a /jarofinstruc- 
tion to that enVct. 

The deed of the 2S1h August does not pa*^s the estate or interest of the 
re«ervees to the memorialists. It is not exidence (d" a memorandum or 
agreement for a sale. Still. I shall admit it is so. rather than examine this 
•jnotion : and then, in what predicament ilo the memorialists stand r They 
<!o not hold the title — the (pialilied fees of the reservee.s. They hold jiothing 
higher than an agi-eement of the Imliaus to ct)nvey their right and title. 

'I'liey have not conveyed their interests, because the chiefs Iih<I not aii- 
thoiity ill wiiting. Somt- additional act must he done, provided they are 
«'ntilh(i. like othei- freemen, to the benefit of the statute «d' frauds and per- 
j'jiies, before they can be divested <d' their freeholds. 

The act whicii has been done by tliese reservees is not sinh as is con- 
leniplated by the treaty, and the well-considered and wise restrictiotH cr)ri- 
tained in the regulatio?is ado|)ted by the I'resident to save these unlettered 
children of the forest from the white man's cupidity. 

To make the best of the case o[ the n»eii>orialists, tliey stami on no 
higlier ground than that of a pai'ty holding an agreement or memorandum 
for a sale executed hy an agent having a jiaiol authority to contract, an«l 
who Comes into a court of chancery seeking a decree for a specific per- 
formance, (See Morllock vs. Builer-, lOth Vesey, Jr. 293.) 

The memoiialists must go behind this agreement of the 28th August. 
and set it up by proof that the cliiefs were authorized by these identical 
ownei's of these reserves to make that contract. ^Nothing less will sat- 
isfy tlie rerjuii-etnents of the jaw, or the demand of common justice atid 
common honesty. In the case of {'oles vs. Trecothick. (9th Vesey, Jr..) it 
was pr'o\ed that Trecothick agreed to the very terms set forth as the jiarol 
agreement between the jjarties, anri gave, in the most express terms, the 
authority that was exercised by the agent. If this ))roof liad not been 
made, the chancellor would not have dared to stir in behalf of the coni- 
])!ainants. 

Ill this case, the statement of Mr. Campliejl and the lestinmny oi' Cap- 
tain I'age are relied on to pi-nve that the chiefs were invested with aiithoiMv 
lo contract, and also had the assent of the reservees to all the stipulations 
and conditions containerl in tliat agreement. Let us see what tliese disin- 
teresteil and unexcepiionaljle witiiesses say. 

The former tells us that the Indians were collected into camps prepar- 
atory to their removal ; that the slaves of the Imliaus had been attached : 
that they themselves had been an-ested on bail writs; were subject to con- 
stant vexation ; that a swarm of hungry creditors, or jjersojis calling 
themselves so, infested their camps, and sei/ed upon all who were siispecieil 
of being in possession of a d(dlar. Under tliese aggiavating and dis- 



[ Doc. No. 274. ] 39 

tressirig circumstances, the contract was clo^^ed. General Jesup, says the 
witness, secured for each bona file purchaser a lair investigation of his 
("laiin, and for each individunl Lutian the right to dissent. 

What mode, if any, was adopted to secure this right to dissent, we are 
not told. The whole transaction, in trutli, was gotten up, carried out, 
and concluded, in a hurry. Six hundred warrio!-s were to be j)rocuied for 
the Seniinole canjpaign. which was to he opened in a shor-t time. Amidst 
the active movements of large emigrating parties for the West, sustained 
at enormous exj)enseun the one side, and tise collection of an efficient mili- 
tary Indian force to he moved on the Southeast, no time was left to search 
out t!ic reservers whose lands had been stolen ; they were not searched 
out; their deliberate judgment was not ascertai!:ed ; and, under the cir- 
cumstatices. could not be imbodied as the ground of any valid binding 
contract concerning their interests. 

Captain Page tells us that many of the chiefs of the Upper Creeks, a»id 
many of their people, were present when the contract was exvcuted. Be 
it so ; but, whetl>er they were these i-eservees, neither he nor any one else 
can tell, for not a step was taken to ascertain Ihis fact. 

Captain Page also tells us *' that the business of the Intlians is managed 
by the cliiefs in council ; the consejit of the individuals is ascei-taincd by 
tlie chiefs, and I vndcrslood that tiiis consent was fully obtained in the mat- 
ter of this contract ; and I know of no better mode of settiitig tiie land 
claims in the short time allowed by General Jesup, tiian the one in whicii 
it was done. " 

This statement is all perfectly true ; but it is not sufficient that the witness 
should have understood that '• this consent" had been given. He must 
knoxv the fact, and prove it, before tiie right of the reservee can be di- 
vesti'd. 

Here, by this testimony, another in\porta»)t (jiiestion arises for our ex- 
amination. Were these Indians in a condition t(» make a conti-act on the 
2Sth of August ? Did tliey stand on fair and equal ground ? Had liiey in 
truth (iny uplion ? 

in tiie case of Fox and Macki'oth (■^ee Cox's Cises in Equity) the couj't 
])rocecded upon the ground that Mr. Fox was not in circumstances t<J make 
the contract in question. So here, the Indians were not j)laced in circum- 
stances to make this contract. It was executed utsder a control almost 
amounting to duiess. As a body of nnni, they had a degree of weakness, 
nnadvist'd as they were, amounting very nearly to legal incapacity. 

It may be urged that t!ie memorialists are entitled to a confirmation of 
the contract in question, by reasoti of j)art j)erformance in the payment of 
the sum of thii ty-seven thousand live hundi-ed (i(dlars. If the chiels were 
fully authorized to make the contract cd" the 28th of August, and to receive 
t!ie money that was ])aid, Watson and others were not hound to see the 
application of this purchase-money. Tliis is Jiot one of those cases em- 
braced in the doctrine on this head of chancery. 

Let us see how this question of j)art performance, by the payment of a 
mciterial portion <d' the pnrcliase-mojiey, stands upon authority. 

Formerly it was decided in England, that the payment of a material 
jia'-t of tlie purchase-money was a p'art peiformance of a contract for land, 
ami would take an agreement for its sale out of the operation of the statute 
of IVau(!y. Stich was the decision of Lord Hardwirke, 2d Atkyns, Lacoa 
vs. Martin; Owen vs. Davis, 1st Yesey, sen.; in Main vs. Melbourne, 



40 [ Doc. No. 27-1. ] 

4tli Vfsey, jiiii., Tin. The court siistainod tlic <l<icttitic advatircd in the 
cast" ill Alk^yiix. This (|iiesti()ri lias l)tH'ii examiiMMl in in:uiy nf tlio coni'ts 
(if Ihc I nitcd States; st-e 2(1 Day, ^25; 5th do. 67; Sd Cainc's Cases in 
Error. 87: 5tli IJinney, 2lG ; 15th Massa. 85. 

But in the case of Clitiaii rs. Cooke, Loi-<l Redesdalc, wliose decisions 
are always regarded witli respect and adiniiation, has ilecided tliat jjay- 
metit of piirchasc-nioney is nr)t u |iai-t peifoiinance. In that case the court 
said, •* Nothing is to be considered a part perloitnance which does not put 
the parly into such a situation that it is a fraud upon him unless the 
agreement he performed ; as, for instance, where possession is taken, the 
party becomes a tiespassii- if there be no agreement ; in which case, for 
the |niipose of dffendirig himself against a charge which niig'.t be made 
against him, such evidence is admissible, and, if it be admissible for such 
])urpose, there is no reason why it should not be admissible throughout. 
But payment of money is not jiart perfoimance, for it may be repaid, 
and then the jiarties will be just as tliey were before, especially if re|)aid 
witli interest." It would seem that this case contains the true doctrine, 
and, therefore, that the payment of the sum of thirty-seven thousand five 
hundred dollars is not a part jierformance of the contiact of the esth of 
August, and does not take the case out of the operation of the statute of 
frauds and perjuries. 

We come now to the (jnestion of the inadefjiiacy of the consiileration 
agreed \o be j)aid for the^e six hundred and fifty l•eser^es. 

It is insisted that tiiis consideration is wholly inade(|uafe, and that upon 
this ground the contract of the ilSth of August is void, and should not he 
confirmed hy the ['resident. 

Let us look into this case upon authoi'ify. There is no case, says Chan- 
cellor Kent, in 2d Johnson's Chancery Reports, page 23, where mere in- 
adefjuacy of price, independent of other ciicumstances, I-ias been held suf- 
ficient to set aside a sale made between parties, standing on ctjunl ground, 
and dealing with each other without aiiy impositifni (tr opjjression. The ine- 
<juality amounting to I'raud must he so sircnig and manifest as to shock the 
conscience and c:infou:Ml the judgmetit of any man uf common sense. See 
also 9th Vesey.jun., 246, and 16 do. 517. 

It is to be observetl here, that there is a very important distinction which 
runs through all the cases between oidering a contract to be rescinded ami 
decreeing a specific |)erforinance. Inadetjiiacy of price is not a ground 
lor decreeing an agreement to b(^ delivered u[), or a sale to be rescinded, 
(unless its grossncss amount to fraud.) yet it may he sullicient for the court 
to refuse to enforce from inaderpiacy, and at the same time refuse to rescind. 

If the memorialists have ctnitenled themselves with u contract and not 
a conveyance, they. o»i pi-oof of great inadeijuacy of j)rice, are not entitled 
to a confirmation of their claim from the President. 

If advantage be taken on either side nf the ignoratice or distress of the 
othei', or piominent facts are concealed, such cit cumstances afford a new 
and distinc I ground, and great inader|uacy may form a presumption of op- 
pr-ession. If inipositimi be pia(tise<l, the contract w ill beset aside. — 3d 
Vesey and Beames, 117. 

The reserves in this case at the time of the sale wcie heavily encum- 
bered. Lands so situated have no determinate value, and are not to be 
estimated by the |)rice of lands the title to which is clear. 

It appears to me that the price agreed to be given for l.'iese lands is not 



[ Doc. No. 274. ] 41 

so inadequate that a chancellor, on the evidence adduced, taking merely 
the inadequacy into view, would be authorized to refuse as|)ecific perform- 
ance to Watson on the one side, or to rescind the contract in favor of the 
reservees 0!i the other. 

But the question i-ecurs : Is this case one of mere inadecjuacy of price ; 
or are tliete facts and circumstances connected with this inade(|uacy which 
demand imperatively that the Pi'esident should refuse to coisfirm tlie con- 
tract of the 28th August ? I think that there are. But that the President 
may be fully able to decide for himself, it is necessary to examine with care 
and circums{)ection the proofs which apply to this part of this cause. 

The preamble to the contract of the 28th August declares, that the 
chiefs who are i>arties to tlie same allege, in behalf of individuals of the 
Creek tribe, that frauds had been perpetrated upon the reservees of lands, 
whereby their* titles had become involved with difficulty, their rights, 
jeopardized, atid confidence in their security impaired : that whereas in- 
vestig<!ti<)iis had taken place without results, and they (the Indians) are 
about to leave the lands ceded to them for their homes intiie West : To the 
end of settling all their business in this country, of transferring from 
themselves the burden of litigation, and of obtaining something for their 
claims p!o|)ortioHed to their value, the chiefs have advised their people to 
accede to some general disposition of them, and they sell to Watson and 
others ''all the tracts and parcels of lansls lying and being in that ])art 
of the territory ceded in the treaty of 1832, comprised within the district 
of larids of which R. W. McHenry was the certilyiiig agent, which has 
foi'med tiie subject of contest before the agents of the United States, and 
which have either been certified and marked for reversal, or which have 
been sold and certified without authority in the agents of the United States 
to witness said sales or certify said contracts, the same being the cases 
contained in the reports of the investigating agents." 

It will be seen that the reserves here intended to be purchased are those 
on whicli John B. Hogan had rej)orted, being about six hundred and fifty 
in number, each containing three hundred and twenty acres. By this 
contract Watson and othei-s have borne the highest testimony to the accu- 
racy and integr-ity of that officei*. They have staked a large sum of 
money upon his correctness. If they had not known that the cases re- 
versed by Hogan were fraudulent, and that the persons in whose names they 
stood certified, could not hold them, tliey would hardly have given any, 
tlie smallest sum, for the right to contest them. 

But who were they who clain:ed large portions of their lands, that had 
become involved with difficulty by the perpetration of fraud ? We must 
look for tlieir names, and recoi-ded evidence of their acts in [>ast times, to 
the abstract of Colonel ilogan. It will not be permitted to Watson and 
others to dis|)Ute the trutii of tiiis document ; for one of their witnesses, 
^^oo<hvH_rd, swears that tlie memorialists conned it over just before the 
contract was closed, and interrogated him about the value of certain tracts 
designated therein. 

Indeed, this abstract was to be at once a shield to pi'otect the memorial- 
ists, and a sword in their hands against all those who would not ask that 
their contracts should be *^ respected,^' to use the language of the witness 
Taylo!-. 

If the contract under consideration were confirmed to-day, to-morrow 
the meniorialists would demand of the Pi-esident, as they would have an 



42 [ Doc. No. 274. ] 

undoubted riglit to do uiidor llie j)r')visioiis of tliat rnntrart, that an agoiit 
should be aj)|)oifitod to iiivestigati* tlie frauds i-eported by IL)gati ; and his 
abstract. swoIUmi as it is into a folio voiiinie, would reveal the names of 
those who had been einj»loyed in plundering the ignorant savages of their 
jiropcity. In a word, the memorialists would be substituted for the reser- 
vees, and would stand in their shoe-^. This (lovei-nment agent would 
prosec ule his laht»rs at the public expense, not for the benefit of tliose who 
had been wronged, but for the esju-cial advantage of those who had per- 
petrated many of the injuries comj)!aini'd of. 

liut let us turn oui* attention to tlie pai'ticular facts found in tliis 
abstract. 

One of (he first names that meets the eye, is that of William "NValker. 
one of the memorialists — a party to the contract (»f 2&lli of August ! 
I'hirty-nine cases to whicli his name was attaclied were reversed by IJogan, 
co\ering t\vel\e thousand four bundled and eighty acre*;, which, atone 
dollar and twenty-five cents per acre, would bring fifteen thousand six 
bundled dollars. 

In iliese thirty-nine cases, Walker has divers partners. They arc 
Thornton, McDougald, Coker. & Company, Vi'ho cotistitute this coinpany. 
AAC are luit told ; and how lar >\ alker w as interested in other reversed coti- 
tracts, standing in the names of his co-partiiei-s. we are left to conjecture. 
To what extent his interest as a dormant pai-tner reaches, has m)t been 
disch.sed. 'j'he witness, Jol) Taylor, swears that, to his knowledge, 
AValkei- atnl Watscm are interested in claims reversed on the giound tliat 
the right Indian was personated. 

The next name in this abstract which ai'i'ests our attention, is that of 
John I'eabody. He is also a jjarty to the contract of the 28th August. 
Jn exhibit A, hereto aj)petided, theie are twenty-six half sections cejtified 
to I'eabody, amounting to 8,320 acres, which, at gl 25 per acre, an^ 
efjiial to ten tiiousand foui* hundred (hdlars. 'I'he partnei's of Peabody 
aie Watson, lludsoii, I'hornton, Reeves, NVojsham, and Companif. 

The next name is that of McDougald. He is a partner of Walker. 
There aie 51 cases in the name of McDougald and his co-partners noted 
by Hugan for leversal. The amount of these cases is 16,320 acres. 
N\hich, at ^ 1 25 per aci-e, are etjual to ^20.500. There are ujiwaidscjf 
twenty cases in this abstract certified to the witness Job Tayloi-, but he 
tells us ihat he is intei-csted in from 40 to 45. These amount to 12.800 
acres, which, at $1 25 per acie, arc ecjual to ^16,000. 

Woodward, a witness for the menniiialists, acknctwledges that he has a 
deep interest in the reversed (ontracls. Can any man believe that the 
l)arties to the contract of the 28th August do not cherisli a fraternal feel- 
ing towards their partners ? Would it not be cruel anil unnatural in 
I'eabody and his associates not to cast t!io fnldsof this protecting contract 
o\er the shouhh'rs of their brethren in speculation, and unite with them in 
a cause of mutual danger and distress ? 

I have set down these lands at the average price of Si 25 j)ei' acre, 
because, since the certification by McHenry, the j)rice of Indian reserves 
has advani ed one hunilied per cent. 

The question will be asked. Did tin* Irnlians stand on fair and etpuil 
grouri'ls, wIu'u the contract (d" the 2otli August was dosed ? Were they 
jdaced in ciicumstances l)y M'atson \ Co. to make (hat contract? Were 
the secrets id" this abstract which >\'atson and otheis held in their posses- 



[ Doc. No. 274. ] 43 

sion reveale*] to GeneralJesup or to Mr. Campbell, or to the Indians ; and 
wci-e tliey told that they, the metnorialists, wei-c claimants of lai-ge mim- 
bcrs ol'ihese reversed contracts ? They certainly were not. 

Facts of vital importance, necessary to enlighten the ininds of General 
Jesiip and the Indians, were studiously concealed. 

On one side tiiere were knowledge, skill, and management ; on theothei-, 
ignorance and mental imbecility in the actual owners (»f the lands. On the 
one side, there was overwhelming strength ; on the other, unresisting weak- 
ness j and lastly, on one side, thei-e was wealth and active capital ; on the 
otlier, sfjualid poverty and deej) distress. 

Would not tlie mind of every sound equity lawyer be filled with amaze- 
ment, were he to i-ead that a cliancellor in Great Britain or the United 
States had decreed that such a contract as this, undei- the circumstances 
attending its execution, should be specifically performed ; 

If the statute of frauds does not reach and control the contract of the 
28ih Aui^ust ; if it is not aftected by any of the laws of Alabama, and 
stands or falls wholly uninfluenced by them, and must be govei-ned only 
by the provisions of the treaty ; still, like every other contract, it must be 
afTected by the principles of natural justice, by fraud, concealment, injus- 
tice, oppression, distress, inadequacy of price, and the suggestion of false- 
hood. 

We have now reached the last leading question which this case presents 
for our consideration, to wit : Whether this contract is in conformity to 
the j)i-ovisions of the treaty of March, 1832, to the regulations of tlie Ex- 
ecutive with regard to the sales of Creek Indian reserves ; arsd whether 
the national faith, which is pledged to the Indian in that treaty, would be 
violated by a confirnsation of this contract. 

In the 2d article of the treaty, it is provided that each head of a family 
may select one half section of land, which tracts shall be reserved from 
sale for theij* use for the term of five years, unless sooner disposed of by 
them. 

In the Sd article, it is declared that these tracts may be conveyed by the 
pei'sojis selecting tiie same, to any other perstni, /or a fair consideraiiim, in 
such manner as the President may direct. The contract shall be certified 
by some person appointed for that purpose by the President, but shall not 
be valid until the President aj)j)roves the same. 

Tiie ))ower of contracting lor a sale is hei-e resei'ved exclusively to the 
Indians, and for the term of five years. They might remain (juiescent if 
(hey pleased. But if their "ivlll was excited inti> activity, then the super- 
vising agency of the President became indispensable. He was bound to 
see that tlie |)ropos('d sale was for a fair con.s Ld-Cration. He cannot confirm 
any sale nnle-<s his conscience is satisfied that the consijleration to be j)aid 
is fair. Until this event does occur, the Pi-esident is but a jjassive instru- 
ment under the trea'y. When it d(<es occur, his authority is awakened into 
life and enei-gy. 

Every contract for a resei-ve is required to be certified by sonje jierson 
apjiointed by the President for that pui-pose. 

The act of General Jesnp in signing tiie contract of the 28th August, is 
of no greater legal authoi-ity than if it !)ad been signed by a mei-e certify- 
ing agent, althouglj he held a high command in tiie army of the South. His 
act was to be subir.itted to the supervision of the President, as tiie treaty 
expressly requires. 



44 



[ Doc. No. 274. ] 



The President oT tlie United States is clothed with great powers. But 
lie deilves llieni fnun the r«)iistitutioii arnl the laws. He can no inoic 
transcenfl the resti-iclioiis of either, thatj the hiunhlest inilividiial in the 
community. 

Tiie national faitli is solemnly |)le(lge(I in the tr'*aty of 183-2, that the 
('reck reservi'cs shall receive a lair considci-afion loi- tiieir reserves ; that 
an honest Ijargain shall be driven witli tlienj in all the contracts made lor 
their reserves. 

'Ihe untarnisiied personal honor- of the Executive is pledged to a sabred 
discharge of the ol)ligations imposed upon him by this treaty. He is placed 
by that instrument iii /oco ;)r/reri/ts towards these dcgi-aded and helpless 
savages, and their women and children. 

It is alleged tiiat the [Resident constituted General Jesup the agent to 
certify this conli'acf. If so. we must find the power, and see whether it 
has been strictly pursued. If the contract is at war with the stipulations 
contained in the ti-eaty, the presumption is, that General Jesup mistook 
bolli the jiature and extent c)f his authority. 

As soon as the reserves conceded by the treaty were surveyed and allot- 
ted, the manner in which they weret(» be disposed of was regulated. The 
Indians were j)ermitted by the treaty to sell and convey in such manner as 
tiie I'lesident might direct, on condition that they ret fived a fair consider- 
ation. Why was this conditio?! inserted ? Sim{)ly because the reservees 
Were liable to gross imposition. A heavy white pi)|)ulation was collerted 
along the wlnde westei-n boundary of tlie Creek country, and along tiie 
whole extent of the Chattahoocliie, stretching south nearly three hundred 
miles on its eastern boundary. This population was pressing Iwavily ujion 
them, an<l had already broken in on the Creeks at many points. Under 
these circumstances, what diil tlic President do in tlie discharge of his duty 
as a j)arty to the treaty, representing the nation? 

lie declared as follows: ♦• I'hat all ap|)lications foi- certifying contracts 
with Creek reservees should be made in v. riling, and should be accompanied 
by the written contract itself. That if the |)ayments were all made to the 
satisfaction of the Indian, and the fart was (dearly established to the satis- 
faction of the apj)rnving agent, tlien an absolute deed from the Indian to the 
white person may be certified. That if the payments were !iot all mado 
at the time the parties appeaie«l before the approving agent, then the con- 
tract should distinctly state the time ant! mode of pav ment, and the amount 
actually received ; that the agent should make such inquiry as might be in 
his power, into the actual value of the tracts ; and if he believes that such 
value is nr)t paid or secured, he should not certify the contract." 

It was fur-ihei" oi-dered that, in every case where it was practicable, the 
agent should have an interview >vith the Indian. ex[)lain to him the tians- 
actiofi, and ascertain whether he understood and approved it on a full con- 
sideration of the niatter ; that the approval ol' the agents was in no case to 
be final, nor was the title of the grantee to be valid, until the President ap- 
jiroved the same. See <Iocument No. 276, p. 88. 

It will be perceived from these regulations that they were easily to be 
understood, and that the great object of the President in adopting them, 
was, to secure to each Itidian a fail- ((insideration for his reseive. 'I'hese 
regulatio'.-.s are to this moment unrepealed, and the ceitifying agetits now 
acting under- tlie authoi-ity of the Cicek commissioners ai-e pursuing them. 
In these regulations no authority for the act of General Jesup of the 28th 



I Doc. No. 274. J 45 

August can be found. It is not pretended tliat lie acted conformably to 
tliesc regulations, in the arrangesnent between the Creek cliiefs, Watsoti 
and otliers, and bimseiF. 

But on tbe 9t!j of May, 1836, Captain Page addressed a letter to the 
"War Dej)artnient, the consents of wbicb require particular examination. 
See doc. No. 276 H. R. p. 384. About tiie time this letter was wiitten, 
the friendly Indians became sensible that tliey must remove to the West. 
'I'he frauds which had been committed uj)on them were certainly one cause 
of their opposition to a removal. A conference was held with Opothe Yoholo 
and other Indians by Captain Page, and in that conference this leading 
chief pi()j)osed as follows: ''A company of gentlemen have seen nearly all 
tlie comjjanies who purchased our lands, ami they have agreed to raise a 
sum of money ecjuivalent to the value of the lands we claim to have been 
defrauded of. They pi'opose to pay us in this way. He says. I will call 
all the persons in my town together, whose lands have been taken by per- 
sonating, or where other frauds have been practised upon them, and the 
purchaser or his agent being ])rcsent, in the jirescnce of two principal 
chiets of each town, and an agent of tlic United States, pay to the rightjul 
holder o[ \\\{i land a sum of money to his and tUrt chiefs' full satisfaction ; 
and in case the parties cawnot agree, two respectable and disinterested 
white men shall, one by the chief and one by the purchaser, be selected to 
value the land; and t!ie amount of their valuation, under oath, shall be |)aid. 
The chiefs of each town are well acquainted, and know all the frauds 
and the injured })ersons, and in this way we can settle all our difficulties 
and relieve the Government of all further trouble with us." 

Here was an honest pr-oposition on the part of this uneducated Indian. 
It agreed substantially in its terms with the regulations of the President. 
It re(juired that i)ayment should be made to the riglitful holder of the land, 
to his and the cli lets' full satisfaction. 

We must now turn ouj* attention to the instructions of the Secretary of 
War upon this subject, dated 19th May, 1836. See doc. No. 276, p. 86. 

In tliis letter the Secretary of \S nv observes : "I enclose you a copy of 
a letter fiom Caj)tain Page, by which you will perceive the views of that 
officer on the subject (the frauds on the Creeks) and the proposition made 
by the Ujiper Cieeks. This proposition has been ap|>roved, and Captain 
Page advised of the fact. So far, tiierefore, as any |)artorthis division of 
the Creeks shall i-emain j)caceable, you are authoiized to sanction ihe pro- 
ceeding recommended." 

Again the Secretary observes, ''If the arrangement stated by Captain 
Page should take efttct, you are authoi-ized to select a competent officer, 
should the Indians desire it, to see that justice is done." 

'I'he p'lwers of General Jesup aie hei-e limited to the pi'oj)osi!ion of 
Ojjothe Y')hnlo, and that jjroposition was accej)ted by the Departnient with 
every restiiction attached to it. No discretionary power was given to 
Gcnral Jesup concerning it ; noi- could such discretion have been given 
la\\ fully by Goveriu)r Cass, because the reservees could not dispose of their 
reserves, unless for a fair consideration. The })roposition of Opothe Yoholo 
expressly demanded this/«ir consider atinn. 

It is my opinion that General Jesup ha<l no authority to sign the con- 
tract of tlie 28th of August, and that, in doing so, he exceeded the power 
with which he was invested. 

The undersigned reached the scene of these transactions within thirty- 
six hours after the contract of the 28th August, and sought an interview^ 



46 [ I3oc. No. 274. ] 

Mitli General Jcsnp. lie brramr satisfied that this officer, in transcending 
his iuilhoiilv. Ii:id acdd i:ii(!cr a (Ife|i anxiety to promote ihc be.-,t iiiicfests 
of thtt country. 

It has bctii said, ♦* If the fact be that any of the iHirchascrs named in 
tlie contract uf thi- !28lh ofAuL^nst hoh) IVaudiilent ( laims t() Indian reser- 
^ations, that they are men of wealth, anil emphtyed agrnts to purchase these 
lands for ilicm: that if frauds were committ«'d, they had mi knoNNh'dge of 
them." !>«• it so — ••ciiar-ity thinketh no evil." But it is very certain that 
the law iti siifli a case as this will seize iipini tlie fruits of nnconsi ientious 
prartices, wiiether they shall he found in ilic hands of innocent j)rincipals, 
or i:i those of ihcir pcdlntcd agents. 

All of which is re,-.j)ecifullv submitted. 

ALFRED BALCII. 

Cumuiissioncr. 

December 7, 1836. 

In the matter of the memorial of James C. \Vats(»n and otl:ers, atid tlie 
c<innter-mtiiiorial of Ware, Dougherty, and others, filed before thecommis. 
sioners appointed by tin; President of the United States to examine certain 
alhged frauds in the sale of (Ji-eeU Jmlian reservations : 

The memorialists. James C. Watson and others, have filed their memo- 
rial, alleging, in substance, as follows : That they purchased from certain 
Indian cliiels of the Creek tril)e of Indians, acting cm behalf of the itnli\ idu- 
als of tiieir tribe, whose claims to lands had either been certified and 
marked f»r reversal, or which had been sold and certified without authority 
in the agents of the United Stales (said tracts being contained in the le- 
jjorts of the investigating agents) all of tiie Indian reserves so situated, 
and also the reserves of all those Creek Indians who weie entitled as such 
under the treaty with the Creek tribe dated 24th Marcli, 1832.. and wiio 
had not sold the same. 

The memorialists allege further, iliat they were called on by Majm- 
General Jesup, wlut then commanded llie army of the South, to know iipim 
w hat terms they wduld purchase said lands ; that said purchase was made, 
with tlie apjirobation of the ollicer w ho represented the United States in 
the execution of tlio saitl contract of sale and purchase. 

I'he memorialists further allege, that no IVaud, artifice, combination, or 
unfair practices were employed by them to obtain said contract : tiiat the 
j)articular terms of said contract were arranged between the agf'uts of the 
United States and the said r-idians ; that they di<l not advise or consult 
with the chiefs, but with the olliceis of the United States, who ctnniiiuni- 
cated the projmsitions of the Indians to the said memorialists, and read 
their answers for the Indiatis. 

The memorialists declare, that they paid on said contract thii'ty-seven 
thousand five hundred dollais to Captain .Iidin I'age, for and on account 
of said Indians, and exfcufed their note for the like amount, payable four 
months alter date to said l*ag<'. in trust lor the Indians, as a full consiim- 
m.ition on their part <d' the said contract. 

Anil it is fill ther a\eire(l by the miMnorialists, tha' the said contrart 
provides that the consent of each imlividual holding a reserve as afoiesaiil 
should be presumed, unless he should dissent before t!ie consummation of 
the contract; they, the memorialists, declare tliat \\\ey know of no dissent, 



[ Doc. No. 274. ] 47 

and pray an execution of the said contract, by tlie emanation of patents to 
them for all tlie said lands. 

I'he said inenioiialists allege, that the originals, or copies of the reports 
of the investigating agents, as well as the said conti-act itself, arc in the 
])ossession of the commissioners aforesaid, and ask that .reference may be 
liad thei-eto, as evidence of tlie truth of their allegations: they also aver 
that they, the memorialists, aie parties to some of ihe contracts contained 
in the said leports, and pi-ay that their titles to these tracts may be 
confirmed. 

The men)oriaIists state, and charge, that there arc many contracts for 
Indian reserves in said Mclienry's district, which they believe to have 
been made in/jvija/ of the rights of the Indians, located thereon, which they 
pray that they may be permitted to contest. 

The memorialists admit that there are contracts foi* Indian reserves 
which are fair and bona fide, and that the purchasers arc willing to pay 
foi- the same ; they pray that the article with regard to these, C(yniained in 
the said agreement, may be enforced. 

The memorialists ask that no contract for a reserve to a Creek Indian 
lying in the said McHenr-y's district shall be cei-tilied without a notice to 
them of the application. 

They finally pray that all the lands lying in said district for the sale 
of wliich no valid r)utstaiiding bonils have been taken, may be appi-aised 
and adjudged to them according to the Jerms of the said contract. 

The memorialists, to sujjport the allegations in their memorial, ami tlie 
claims founded thereon, and the several |)rayers thereof, read in evidence 
the contract which was made by them witi» the said Tliomas S. Jesuj) and 
the said Indian chiefs. 

The substance of the preamble to tlie said contract is as follows : Tliat 
a treaty had been made between the United States and the Creek tril»e of 
Indians, on the 24th day of JMarcii, 1832 ; that each head of a family in 
the said tribe had become entitled thereby to one half of a section of land, 
which had been duly allotted ; that the said heads of families might sell 
their reserves with the approbation of the Presi(ient of the United States, 
and through the agency of a certifying agent; that the chiefs who wei-e 
j)arties to the said contract alleged tfiat tiie said heads of families had 
been defrauded out of tiieir reserves, the titles to which had become involv- 
ed in difficulty and doubt; and tliat the Creek Indians wei'c about to re- 
move to their homes in the West. 

The preamble to the said conti-act declai'cs fui'ther : Tiiat, to the end of 
settling their business in the Ci'cek country, of transferi-ing from them- 
selves the burden of litigatioiu and of obtaining something for their claims 
pro[)ortioned to their value, and at the same time to make a j)rovision for 
the fair and bona fide puri;liasei's from the [)eople of their tribe, the chiefs 
have advised their people holding said claims to accede to a general dispo- 
sition of them, and have obtained tiuMr consent to convey all their right 
and title to said lands to James C. Watson and others, lying in what is 
called McHenry's district, which have been marked for reversal, or sold 
and certified without authority in the agents of the United States to wit- 
ness said sales or certify said cmitracts. 

This contract contains the following conditions an! restrictions : 

1st. 'I'hat the title hereby obtained, or which may be obtained, in pur- 
suance of this contract, shall not interfere with the rights of any individ- 



48 [ Doc. No. 271. ] 

iial who lias nia<lc a prioi- valid conti-act willi tlie iic;litfiil claimant of said 
lariils, (wlii'tluT till' same liatl bt-cti cerlitied or not. ) «ir any |)art lliereof; 
but the rcs|)cctivc claims (it" necessary to settlemtiit) siiall be investigated 
by an agent a|<j)oitited by tlie I'resident of tlie United States, and the rat- 
iliration by liie I'lesident of the Unite<l States shall be necessary to the 
lieilVciion of the title: ]iro\ided, nevertheliss. that foi* the as( ert>tiiiment 
of the (airness and validity of any claim, as well as for the proieclion of the 
said Janu'S C. M atson and others, they sliall be entitled to the briielit of 
the same rnles that tlie Indians would have l)een entitled to, but for this 
contract, under the instructions of the War Departnjent. 

2d. That when any contract shall be preferied by the said agent, 
upon investigation, the jiarlies, NVatson and others, shall be entitled to the 
same secnriiy for the consi<liralion as the Indians would have had, but 
for this contract : j)ro>ided, if tiie amount paid into the hands oi' the agent 
of tlie Lniied States e.\cee«ls on any parcel of land the /;ro rata valuati(m 
made in this contraet, then one-half of said ov<'i'plus shall be letaineil 
by the agent, for the Indians located upon said reserve, or, if dead, his heirs. 

3d. Ihat tlie money heieinafier stipulated to be paid, shall he paid to 
the Indian entitled to the land, in presence of the chiefs a>id an oHicer of 
the United States ; and until such paymentshall he matle, it shall he depos- 
ited with the ccilifying agent of this liistrict ; the payment of wliich shall 
be a consummation of this contracf. 

4tli. That, if any one Indian, holding any parcel of land herein con- 
veyed, shall refuse to carry into effect the provisions of this contract, 
in that case, a ]}ro rata allowance upon the consideration herein stip- 
ulated shall be made to the said Watson and otiiers : provided, this dis- 
stiit shall he given before the consummation of this contract. 

5th. That all tiiose lands which have not been sold, incliuling those 
where the Indian has died before sale, shall be taken at a valuation, to he 
made by the persons who may be appointed by the agent of the United Stales. 
who shall tinally close the arrangeinents provided for in this contract and 
the treaty : piovided, that they shall not refei- to any claims embra(ed in 
jirevious articles «if this conti act : and jn'ovided, further, that \alid ti- 
tles (an be obtaiiu'd therefor. 

AVatson and others bind themselves to pay foi' the lands aforesaid, in the 
said district, seventy-lne thousand dollars ; one-half in cash, am! the bal- 
ance in four months. 

The memorialists, and several chiefs of the Creek tribe signed and 
sealed the said contract. General Jesiip approves the same in the follow- 
ing wcuds : 

•• Sam tioned by me ; suliject to the ratification of the I'resident of the 
United Slates, August 28, 183G. 

Til OS. S. .TES^UI'. 
Major General, commanding army of the South.^^ 

The evidence read by the memorialists is, in substance, as follows : 
Joii Taylor, a witness, swears that he receixcd, a shoi-t tin>e after the 
emigrating pai»y which licsl went to Arkansas, being a |)orti'»n of the 

Creeks, had left tln'ii- (^unp-, (Vom . a chief of the town, 

which lits in Mcllcnry's tlistrict, between live and six tlniu^and dollars, 
and was diret ted lo pay the same over tu the individual Indians of said 
town, which he did. The share of each Indian amounted to one hundred 



[ Doc. No. 274. ] 49 

and twenty-seven dollars and fifty cents. The number of Indians paid 
was between tlilrty-eiglit and thirty-nine. Deponent was acting as the 
agent of tlie eniigtating party. 

Witness has understood tliat the same parties who made the contract 
for the lands were interested in the emigrating contract. Witness is inter- 
ested in some forty or forty-five contracts marked for reversal. There is 
no understanding between this deponent and any of the paities to said 
contract that his claims should be arranged. He has heard some of the 
parties observe that many of the contracts would be amicably arranged. 
He knoivs that fFalker and Watson are interested in contracts whicli are 
marked fur reversal, on the ground that the right Indian was personated. 

The witness believes that most of his contracts are marked for reversal 
on the same grounds. Deponent does not know that, in any of the con- 
tracts of Watson or Walker, the wrong Indian was introduced ; but 
believes that the agent thought such was the case. The witness does not 
know that Ware, Dougherty, & Company have any contracts marked for 
reversal on that ground. De])onent went to Columbus, in pait to make 
some arrangcn)ent for his contracts marked for reversal ; but he had other 
business there. He made the application to the parties interested, through 
the medium of others. He understood tiiat the claims generally would 
be amicably adjusted ; and that he might feel satisfied, or something to 
that amouiit. 

Deponent says that from what passed between him and General Watson 
at Tallassee, he believed his contract would be respected on the same prin- 
ciples that others would. 

Captain John Page deposeth and saith, that he was in Tallassee in the 
n.onth of August last, wiien General Jesup, in behalf of tlie United States, 
and certain chiefs of the Upper Creeks, made a contract with James C. 
Watson and others, for selling the disputed or fraudulent claims in Doc- 
tor McHenry's district. Tiiis contract was several days under consid- 
ei'ation. On tlie 2Sth of August it was finally concluded. I saw the money 
paid by the parties; and I know that the sum of seventy-five thousand 
dollars was the price to be paid — one-half in cash, and a note at four 
months for the balance. 

I received the money and note, and was directed by Mr. Campbell, tf»e 
attorney, to pay it over to the Indians, whenever they assured me that 
they were ready to receive it on the terms of the contract, which I was 
directed to ascertain were understood by them. And it was by the request 
of the chiefs that I received this money. I proceeded to the square, where 
the Indians met to do their business, when Opothe Yoholo stated to me that 
Jim Boy had gone home to consult his people on the subject, and would 
return the next day, and he would inform me when to return. 

I retired to Tallassee, and the next day or day after (I do not recollect 
which) he, Opothe Yoholo, sent for me and said that they were ready to re- 
ceive the money. I proceeded to the square, and stated to them that I had 
come to pay over the money for their lands on the contract. The Indians 
were in council, and I requested them to say, after I had fully explained to 
them the subject and consideration, that if any of them !.:ad any objections, 
then to state it ; and if there was none, I should proceed to pay it out. 
The chiefs and their people consulted one hour longer, and then gave me 
their answer — that they were ready to receive their money ; that ther« 
was no objection, and every thing was fully understood by them. 
4 



U) [ Doc. No. 274. J 

I was dii*ectr(l by Mr. Campbell, their attorney, to make these state- 
ments lully, tliat thei-e should be no niisuii(lerstaii(lir)g on Uiis subject, be- 
foie I paid the money to thetii. The suliject ol' the note 1 likewise ex- 
jfiainod, and tolil them it was good, and would be paid. I had every rea- 
son l«» believe that the chiefs and Indians generally understood the con- 
trmt, as they were several days in coum( il on the business. I believe that 
the general custom of transacting business am(nig the Indians was fol- 
low e<l in this instance, as I have jor six >ears transacted it with them, and 
in this manner — through their chiefs, with the consent of their people. I 
eoiK eive that U|)eth leholo has more powei- than any chief in the nation 
amiing the Upper Creeks ; and believe that the Government so considered 
him. Many of the chiefs of the Up|)er Cieeks were present, and many of 
their people. The Indians sent for me w hile at Wetumpka, as they w anted 
the money divided. 1 did not do so, and stated that I did not know how 
the money was to be divided. 

I know of no oflTer being made to Cientral Jesuj). or to the Indians, of a 
larger sum tiian the one named in the contract. Tiie business of the In- 
dians is managed by the chiefs in council. The consent of the individuals 
is ascertained by the chiefs ; and I understood that this consent was fully 
obtained in the matter of this contract ; and I know of no better mode of 
ftetlling the land ilaiins, in the short time allowed by Geneial Jcsup, than 
the one in whi( h it was dojie. 

The matter of the contract was not kept a seriet, so far as my knowl- 
etlge extends. It was known tliat the Indians were making a bargain with 
tl»e Government, and some persons, for settling their disputed claim«», for 
aome time befoie it was finally closed. 

Thomas S. Woodward, a witness in behalf of the memorialists Wat- 
Mon and others, dejjoses in substance as follows : That he has seen the In- 
dian chief, Jim lioy, fre(juently since the making of the large contract be- 
tween Watson and others, and the Indian chiefs. On the march to Flori- 
da, and at Appalachicola, witness conversed with Jim Hoy about sai<l con- 
tract. He informed witness that he understood said contract as including 
all the disputed lands in his town ; that he had received seven thousand 
five hundred dollars, as the j)roportion which his town was entitled to, out 
of the uioney |)aid by Watson and others. Jim Boy rerjuested witness to 
tell his people not to listen to pei-sons who should come ann)iig them for 
ll>e pujpose of making them discontented with said contract ; that he would 
take care of their money, and would keep it for tiiem until they «juit the 
country ; and the reason why he had not paid ittu them wa.s, that he knew 
that the officers would take it from them. 

Witness also knows that the Indians in Jim Boy's town have i-eceived 
other large sums of money for lands in said town, the contracts for which 
lands have been marked fur reversal, and which the Indians do iM)t consider 
fraudulent contracts. 

Witness considers the money which has been previously paid to said 
town for lands, together with the proportion i-eceived by Jim Boy out of 
tke money paid by Watson and otliers, as a fair equivalent for the lands 
lA said town, in the way that Indian lands have usually s(dd. 

Witness is well acquainted with the quality of the lan<ls in said town ; 
he also knows that a large pro])ortion of the Indians belonging to Jim 
Boy's town were jyresenl when the negotiation of said contract was goinf. 
•n, including all the principal men in said town. lie was present at th 
time the contract was closed^ and heard Irvia S. Devercux say, that 



[ Doc. No. 274. ] 51 

they would pay liim a certain amount, (wliicli amount witness does not re- 
member,) he would be in favor of the contract ; but if they would not pay 
him, (le would have it broken up if he could. 

Witness is not a member of the company who made the said contract, 
nor interested in the same ; but is interested in several tracts of land, the 
contracts for which have been marked f(n' reversal previous to the execu- 
tion of said contract, but which he expects to be able to settle with the 
said company. Witness is well acquainted with the comm<»n Iiidiiins in 
Jim Boy's town, and knows tliat tliey look up to him, and are governed by 
him, in most instances, in the trarisactiun of business. 

On crosse-xamination, the witness states that he has an interest in some 
contracts in Dr. McHenry's district, marked for reversal ; that he is a 
brother-in-law of James C. Watson ; that he never has had any interest 
in the contract of Watson and others; that he has not ])ledged himself to 
support the said contract, but belimes it to be the best arrangement, for 
both whites and liidians, that couhl be made. 

Witness further states that he has received no satisfactoi-y assurances 
that his claims should be respected more than the claims of other persons; 
that if he can prove his claims just and honest, they will be respected ; 
that said Watson and others have never made any pledges to witness, any 
further than he has heard the members of said com]»any say that all just 
claims should be res|)ected. 

Witness believes General Daniel McDougald as likely to be a party to 
said contract as any person whose name is not inserted in said contract. 

Witness states tiiat he does not recollect of receiving any written com- 
munication from W^atson's company, but has frequently been in ctmipany 
wiih Watson, Harris, and Feabody, since said contract was made, and 
has heard them converse in relation to said contract. 

Said Watson, Harris, and Peabody, observed that said contract was a 
just and fair one ; that the proposition was first made by the chiefs and 
General Jesuj) to enter into said contract, and that the proposition was 
not made by the said Watson, Harris, and Peabody, to the Indians. 

Witness has not understood that the parties generally to the said con- 
tract have personated Indians. It will be found in the books of the in- 
vestigating agents that contracts certified to Peabody & Company have 
been reversed. 

Witness states that he has been in company with said individuals when 
the said contract was the subject of conversation. He did not insist that 
he should be a party to said contract ; but after the contract was closed he 
made ap|)lication for an interest, but was refused an interest because he 
would not advance the sum of money recpiired. 

Witness does not know that the annuity money was pledged for the re- 
funding of the money if said contiact was not confirmed. He heard one 
of the company to said contract say, that if the same was not confirmed, 
they would lose their money if Government did not pay it to them. 

Witness states that he was in Harlin's tavern, inTallassee, in company 
with the members of said contract, at the time they were examining Ho- 
gan's list of reversed cases, and they were consulting as to the price they 
should give to said Indians for said lands, and said purchasers would oc- 
casionally ask witness the value of certain tracts of land. 
, Witness states that he does not know that General Daniel McDougald 
!^ is a party to said contract of James C. Watson and others, 

]i 



52 I Doc. No. 274. ] 

The coiinter-mrmnrials of Irvin Lawson, Jamrs S. Callioiin, Ware, 
Doiiglicity, and Citiii)»atiy» ami others, alh-ge, in snbstance, as follows : 

'I'hat they have been engaged in |)iiicha»'ing Cretk Indian resei-vations, 
under the treaty of March C4, 1S32 ; that the Indian reservces had a right 
to sell their reser\e,s under the restrictions coniained in the iiiles and 
regulations prescribed by the President of the United States, with regard 
to the sale td such reserves; that theie are certain reserves in what is 
called M(Ilenr>'s district, which certain individuals fraudulently and 
wickedly piocured to beceitified tu them by the said Mc Henry, who w;.s 
then aceriif>ing agent duly appointed by the President of the United 
States; that sai«l iiidi\iduals ha\e never coiilracteil furor puichased the 
said reserves of any real owner of the same ; that said Iramlulent persons 
combined with certain Indians, and procured then) to go before said certi- 
fy ing agent, and personate and claim the name of the true owner of said 
tiacis ui land. In conse(|uencc of which acts, the sa'd agent wa« imposed 
iijHUi as to the identity of the .'aid Indians, and certified the said contracts for 
the consideration of the President of the United States, as if they had been 
made by the true owDers theieof. BelieN ing that the Goveiriment would 
not sanction such gross frauds, the memorialists became the purchasers of 
inar.y Indian reserves in said McHenry's district from the true owners 
thereof. 

These reserves, so purchased by the memorialists, were marked for rever- 
sal by the agents of the United States. 

The memorialists further allege, that on the 28tli day of August, 1836, 
a ccnitract was made, purporting to be between the United States of the 
first j)art, certain Indian chiefsof the second part, and James (.'. Watson and 
olheis of the third j)art ; in which cotilract said chiefs sold and forexer 
fpiit claim to the said N> atson and others, of all the lands Inng in 
McHrniy's district aforesaid, and included in the number alleged to have 
been fraudulently certified, ami whidi had formed the subject of contest 
before the agents of the Government of the United States, and the pri\i- 
lege of purchasing all the unsold lands, and those belonging to Indians, 
who had rlied suljsecjiiently to the location and who had not sold. 

The mennnialists aver, that the sum to be |)aid for the contisJed claims 
was seventy-five thousami dollars, and that all the saiti |)roceeding9 were 
saiu lioi ed by llic said Major General Jesu]) on the said aSlli day of 
August, 1836. 

The memorialists declare, that the contracts w liich they have made for the 
resei'Ncs claiir^ed by them they have, ready to show and to prove that ther-e 
arc six hundred and fifty-two reserves mar ked for reversal by the agents 
of the United States in said McHenrj's district, exclusively (»f those to 
v\hi( h the right of pre-emption is attempted to be sccui-ed by the ter-ins of 
said contract. 

'I he memorialists insist that the said contract was made in violation of 
their vested r ights, and in vi(dation of the provisions of the treaty jjf the 24lli 
of Marrh. 1832; and pray that the same maybe declared by the President 
of the United States null and \oid, and of no force or- effect whatsoever. 

The ( (luritei'-memorialists have proved by George Clough, a witness, 
that a pi(i|)osition was marie to the Creek chiefs to take all the disjiuted 
lands in Mdlcnrv's district at valuation. Opothe Yoludo agreed to lire 
proposition, and als*> agrerd to meet at Tallassee for that purpose ; but 
lire chiefs did not meet. Deponent therr offered one hundred and fil ty thou- 



f Doc. No. 274. J 53 

sand dollars for the disputed lands in a body. He believed tbat the dispu- 
ted lands, excluding those that were unsold and tliose laid off to Indinns 
who were dead and had not sold, were worth two hundred thousand dollars. 

These propositions were made a few days before Watson purchased. A 
few days afler the sale the Indians met and protested against it, as a negro 
interpreter, in whom dej)onent had confidence, told deponent. 

The witness was present at the assemblage of the Indians, but did not 
understand their language. 

On cross-examination, witness stated that he and his compahy would 
give one hundred and fifty thousand dollars for the cotitested lands ; that 
his company consisted of himself, his brother, S. H. Hodges, and Colonel 
Seaborn Jones. Deponent did not make his proposition to General Jesup 
or Colonel Campbell. 

I. S. Devereux, a witness, says he was at the square of Opothe Yoholo's 
camp on the day that the first party of Indians started to Arkansas. 
Tuckabatrhee Micco was tiiere. Tiie wiiitc men were ordered to go 
away, unless they had business. Witness said he could not know whether 
he had business or not, unless he could know what the Indians were assem- 
bled there for. It was said tiiey were going to enrol the Indians to go to 
Florida, and that they were going to pay the annuity to the Indians. Two 
or tliree Indians were called up, whose reserves had been purchased by 
dejjonent and one Tliompson. The witness rose and told them that if tliey 
were going to pay //iose Indians any money for their lands, he wished tlien 
to ask them if thty had not sold to witness and Thompson. 

Dubois then rose and said, it would take a week to go through the busi- 
ness. He went off one way, and Tuckabatchee Micco another, and the 
Indians generally dispersed. 

Tuckabatchee Micco had bank notes in his hat, but witness does not 
know how much. Some one said the Indians were assembled to pay them 
for their lands. Edward Hanrick, one of the purchasers with Watson, 
was there, and was engaged in making calculations to see how much each 
Indian would be entitled to out of the money. AH this ha])pened late in 
the evening. Tlie wagons of the emigrating party had started. Depo- 
nent remained till dark, but saw no money paid to the Indians. 

The witness is interested in eighteen reserves, all of which were pur- 
chased subsequent to the reversal of them, and before the contract with 
"Watson and others was made. 

Thomas J. Abbott, a witness, says that he was served with a notice 
from Watson and others not to certify any more contracts ; to which he 
replied, that he would pay no attention; but that if he was forbidden to 
certify any more by the proper authority, he should respect it. Deponent 
was then directed by General Jesup not to certify any more, and he obeyed 
this direction. When these notices were served, witness was engaged in 
certifying contracts which had been marked for reversal, and to which the 
previous purchasers were about to make a relinquishment in writing. 
Tliis class of Ciises deponent was auihorize«l to certify. 

Some time after the making of tlie large contract, Jim Boy came before 
deponent to identify an Indian. He said, if he had sold so much land as 
they sp'>ke of, he did not know it; that he had applied to have his name 
struck from the contract, and that he had been told that it had been done. 
Witness does nut think that Jim Boy could understand the contract 



54 [ Doc. No. 274. J 

entered in(«, if read to liim in tlie words in which it is written. The wit- 
ness slates fnither, that Opothe Yohoht, 'riiikabatchce Micco, Mad Blue, 
atnl Little Doctor aie among the principal chiefs residing in the Creek 
nation, and hclotig to Tiickahatchec town. He knows nothing of the 
authoritij of the |)riri(ipal chiefs, or of their le^iil power. Twenty of the 
ninety principal chiefs were enrolled in I'nckabatrhee town. 

Wililridge Thompson, a witness, swears that Jim Boy protested Ihathe 
did not know that he was selling his people's lands, and that his j)eople 
never had authorized him to sell their- land»^. "^riic people thetnsehes told 
witness, that when they wanted to sell their lands, they would do it them- 
selves. 'J'he witness believes that the half sections in Jim Hoy's town are 
worth one tliousand dollar's each. He knows their lands, and has resided 
in the Crxek country since 1830. 

The treaty of the 24th March, 1832, has two aspects : the one looks to 
the ti ibe or- nation ; the other to each individual, the head of a family of 
the Creek tr-ibe or- nation. 

Art. 1st. The Creek tribe of Isdians cede to the United States all their 
land last of the Mi>isissipj)i river-. 

Art. 2(1. The United States engage to survey the said land, as soon as 
the same can be conveniently done, after the ratification of this treaty, and, 
when the same is surveyed, to allow ninety ])rinci|)al chiefs of the Creek 
tribe to select one section each, and every other head of a Creek family to 
select one half section each ; which tracts shall be reser-ved for sale for 
their use, for the ter-m of five years, rrnless sooner disposed of by them. 
A census of these persons shall be taken under the direction of the Pi-esi- 
dent, and the selections shall be made sd as to include the improvements of 
each persotr v\ithin his selection, if the same can he so made ; anti if not, 
then all the per-sons belonging to the same town, entitled to selections, and 
who cannot make the same so as to include their improvements, shall take 
them in one hotly in a pro|)pr form. 

Art. 3tl. Tliese tr-acts may be conveyed by the persons selecting the same, 
to any other per-sons, for a fair consideration, in such manner as the Pres- 
ident may direct. The contract shall be certified by some person appoint- 
ed by the President for that purpose, hut it shall noi be valid until the 
President ap[)r(»ves the same. A title shall be given by the United States 
on the completion of the payment. 

Art. 4 III. At tlie end of live years, all the Creeks entitled to these selec- 
tions, and desirous of remaining, shall r-ereive patents therefor, irr fee- sim- 
ple, fr-om the United States. 

'J'he pr-o\iso to the 12th article of the treaty declares that this article 
sliall not be construed so as to compel any Creek Indian to emigrate, but 
they shall be fr-ee to go or- stay, as they please. 

See John A. Camjibell's original statement, herewith transmitted. 

ALFRED BALCH, Commissioner. 



Montgomery, Alabama, 

Ocbber22, 1856. 

Gentlfmkn : Your- letter of the 1 Itir instant to General Watson and 
others, \Nith one from General Watson, was received by me last evening. 



[ Doc. No. 274. ] 55 

Your letter to him contains the information that the contract to which 
several Creek chiefs representing tlierein many individuals of the trihe, 
General Watson and others, and tlie U«iited States, were respectively 
partirs, had been referred to your consideration by the War Department, 
and that opinions were required upon its provisions and validity with 
reference to the treaty of 1832. You request that u memorial maybe 
filed, setting forth the claims of Watson and others, with an argument 
(if they choose) in favor of their claims. 

General Watson requests me to prepare these documents, to attend as 
bis counsel to support his claims, and those of his associates, before you. 
Connected as I was with that contract, I do not feel at liberty to receive 
any benefit, in any way, under it, or in consequence of its execution. 1 
am not the counsel of the purchasers under it, nor do I bear that relation 
to them ; yet I have thought it due to General Jesup, and due to General 
Watson and his associates, when the (piestion of its validity is to be de- 
cided, to state the circumstances under which the contract was made, the 
inducements that led to it, and the reasons in support of it. It is a part 
of the history of the country that a portion of tlie duties that were devolved 
upon General Jesup, was, to provide for tiie removal of the Indians, and to 
superintend that work. It became the most arduous and didicult portion 
of the duties he was called to perform. After the hostiles had been conquered 
and removed from the country, several weeks were spent in collecting the 
Indians in camps, [ireparatnry to their removal. The military force, sta- 
tioned in different ])arts of the country, alone kept these people together. 
As the period for them to leave their ancient homes approached, their un- 
willingness to do so increased. When called upon to fix the day for their 
departure, obstacle after obstacle was opposed. At last it became a matter 
of consideration whether military force would not be required to coerc» 
their removal. This shocked every principle of justice ; and the writer of 
this well knows that a meeting was held by the officers of the Alabama 
volunteers, in wiiich they declared their determination not to submit to be 
employed on this service. 

The obstacles offered by the chiefs consisted of demands upon the Gov- 
ernment ; some of which were, to deliver their slaves from attachments, 
and themselves from arrests ; to advance the annuity of 1837 ; to allow 
to some lands, who had been overlooked in the register of reserves ; and, 
above all. to make some disjjosition of their land claims. These submit- 
ted to, they would raise from 600 to 1,000 men for the PMorida campaign, 
and remo> e forthwith. 

These demands were anxiously evaded by General Jesup. He was not 
disposed to meddle with so involved and complicated a business as that 
connected with the unadjusted land claims. The Indians insisted again 
and again. The matter was finally considered, and one of three courses 
of action appeared open for him. All of these contained matter of weighty 
objection. The removal of the Indians was a matter of imperious neces- 
sity ; the Government demanded it; the excited country demanded it; 
their helpless condition demanded it. They remained in the country at 
an expense to the United States nf $10,000 per day, as was calculated by 
General Jesup. The slow and formal mode of sale hitherto pursued could 
not be permitted : this was objectionable on account of delay. Tlie In- 
dians would only be subject to fresh vexation from bail writs ; a swaroi of 



56 [ Doc. No. 274. ] 

knngry creditors (or persons declaring themselves to be so) infested their 
camps, and seized upon all who wcie suspected of bi-ing in possession of 
a (h)llar. If the lands were sold, it must be <ionc in a body. There were, 
then, three courst's open to General Jesuj). 

First, foi- the Government to become the purchaser ; to advance the re- 
quisite sums of money ; and, if there should be any surplus upon an investi- 
gation of the claims and a sale of the lands, fo ])ay it to the Indians. This 
would have been most equitable and just. But General Jesiip Iiad rmt the 
authority to make such a contiact ; the money to execute it was not ap- 
propriated ; the Indians wanted to carry money to Arkansas; the posses- 
sion of the money was the only evidence of a settlement tliat they could 
or would appreciate ; they were not sndsjied that this arrangement should 
le made, and the delays foi* the appropriation of the money to be incurred. 

The second course was to leave the suiiject in tiic posture it tiicn occu- 
pied — to remove the Indians, and investigate the claims, and sell the 
lands afterwards. Tlie Indians objected to this ; they claimed an imme- 
diate settlement of these dilKculties ; tliey expressed their wish to wind up 
all their business in the land they were about to leave; they declareil, with 
much force, that they would carry the evidences of fraud witli them, and 
that investigation would be (lillicult. I refer you to the jireamble ot the 
contract, whicli repeats almosts verbatim what they said was their m itivc 
for the sale. Tiiis coui-se was reluctantly al»andoned by General Jesup. 

The third course was that pursued. The objection to that was the 
diOiciilty of procuring an adefpiate consideration. None were willing to 
buy IathIh shingled (ixev with titles, except those, perhaps, who had been en- 
gaged in speculations. It was difficult even for tiiose to tell how far the 
transaction might be prudent and safe. The advance of mojiey i-equired 
was great. Tnis course was adopted : General Je8U[) securing for eacli 
bo.ia fide purchaser a fair investigation of his claim, and for each individ- 
ual Indian the right to dissent. I submit to every man whether, under 
all the cii'cumstances. the course adoj)ted was not the most judicious. 
The Indians were well satisfied. Chiefs who were not embraced in the 
arrangement made apjjiication, to my knowledge, for a similar disposition 
of their claims. The warriors for Fh)ri(la were obtained, and the emigra- 
ting parties fortiiwitli started foi- the West. 

I deem it proper here to state, that I never have had the sliglitest con- 
nexion or claim tf) any portion of these lands ; I have not the most remote 
connexion with any puichaser of Indian reserves ; I was summoned by 
General Jesup to attend to these arrangements ; and I had no motive for 
advancing them, other than the wish to aid him in the discharge of his 
duties. 

I will now proceed to examine the contract with reference to the treaty 
of 18 32. 

It has ever been considered by the War I)e|)aitment that tlie legal title 
to the Indian reservatif)ns has always remained in the Government of the 
United States. This opinion was expressed by General Cass, in 1833, 
in his correspondence with Governor Gayle, and enforced with so much 
ability as to receive general support and arcpiiescence. lie says, «» These 
♦ biffs [those whf) negotiated the ti-eaty] were exceedingly anxious that a 
fttipulalion should be insei-ted providing for the extension of the intercourse 
act of 1302 over the country, and thus vesting the whole jurisdiction in 



f Doc. No. 274. I 57 

the United States. But they were explicitly told that the President could 
not and would not assent to this; but as the land, by t'.ie cession, would 
become the property of the United States, all intruders from it should be 
removed as they should be removed from other public lands." 

The same opinion was expressed in the controversy by Judge Hopkins, 
one of the judges of the supreme court of this State. He says, that ''accord- 
ing to the treaty, the legal title to all the lands is in tlie United States. 
Tlie Indians have no right, upon any condition, to sell improvements ; and 
none to transfer reservations, but upon contracts which the President may 
approve. Should they do either act, there would be no autliority for it ; 
it would be a violation of a right of the United States in the lands of the 
Union, which the treaty does not relinquish. As an individual might do 
in the case I have supposed — recover the land by a law-suit, which is the 
lawful mode for him to obtain redress for the injury; so the Government, in 
the existing case, has the right to pursue the remedy which is lawful for 
her — and that remedy is the one that the act of 1807 prescribes. In regard 
to the improvements and reservations, also, until the end of five years from 
the ratification of the treaty, or until they may be sold under the Presi- 
dent's ratification : the Government is a trustee for the Indians, and, as 
trustee, refused by the contract which gave her this character to allow the 
Indians to sell the right to the possession of the improvements or of the 
reservations. As the United States did not give the right to the Indians to 
sell the possession of either, a purchase of the possession is a violation, not 
only of the legal rights of the Government, which would authorize her to 
enforce the act of 1807 ; but it is a clear violation of the trust committed 
by the treaty to tlie Government, whiclj that solemn instrument intended 
to secure for the exclusive benefit of the Indians, in defiance of their acts, 
which miglit be the consequence of their drunkenness, their ignorance, or 
their weaknesses." 

This opinion has been adopted in the supreme court of this State. 
That court has determined that the right to dower was not an incident to 
the estate of a chief in one of the reserves. That the trust was not of such 
a character as that any interest in the land, beyond possession, became an- 
nexed to it for the benefit of the Indian. That his right was a riglit to 
occupy — a right to sell with the consent of the United States ; and after 
five years, on condition of his receiving an absolute right in the land it- 
self, to be evinced by patent from the United States. These opinions 
have settled the minds of the legal profession on tliis subject, in this State. 
In recurring to the treaty, we find abundant support for this construction. 

The Indians, having nothing but an occupancy right, cede that to the 
United States, which claim, before this cession, the absolute fee. The Indi- 
ans reserve from this cession, for each head of an Indian family, a particu- 
lar portion described in the treaty. The occupancy riglit to this is re- 
tained. T he privilege (previously enjoyed) of selling the land, with the 
consent of the United States, is retained. The privilege of holding the land 
in ])erpetuity, is granted: *' provided, at the end of five years, that they 
shall be desirous of remaining." The title is to he completed by the Uni- 
tpd States. In the mean time, the possessory right reserved is to be 
defended from intrusion, as the Government defends other rights of prop- 
erty ; and property must be had in the land, before this right to protection 
could be exercised. 



58 [ Doc. No. 274. ] 

The Government being, then, the sole proprietor of the land, and being 
charged with a disposition of it, for the benefit of the Iiulians respectively, 
was not tied down to any formal mode of disposition. The War Depart- 
nient has more than once sanctioned the idea that the reserves were rights 
which did atlord a legitimate subject for a treaty with tlie tribe. 

lu 1833, Messrs. Benson, Martin, and Filzpatrick, were appointed 
to negotiate witii the leading chiefs for a deputation to be made of some of 
their number to visit Washington city, in order to treat witli the United 
States for a sale of the Indian reserves. The instructions to these, gentle- 
men state : (tiiey are before me,) that »4he President is very desirous that 
an ariangement of this nature should be made with those Indians, as he is 
firmly persuaded that their |)rosperity, and, in fact, existence, depend up- 
on it. But he is also satisfied that the measure could be much better 
accomplished here, tlian in their own country, wiiere they might be sur- 
rounded with ati improper and extraneous influence. You aie therefore 
authorized to propose this subject to the Creek Indians, and say to them, 
if they \\ill appoint a deputation of six or eight persons, and fully author- 
ize them to treat for cession of their reserves," Ate. 

Suppose such a treaty to have been made : would any Indian, or purcha- 
ser from an Indian, have been |)ermitted to hold said reserve r Suppose 
a patent should issue from the Government, to the purchasers under this 
contract : what party could (piestion the title ? Tlie answer is, the title 
would be perfect. The rpiestions then arise upon the contrat t, or rather, 
of equitable consideration. There is no question of the power of the Gov- 
ernment. The question then arises. Can this contract be considered as 
imbodying tlie sentiments of the Creek Indians ? The chiefs who signed 
it are the principal chiefs of the trihe; none others were consulted during 
the war. Their voice was loud to their people. They were rer|uired to 
consult with them ; they declared they iiad done so ; they professed to know 
their wishes ; they urgently demanded this sale, as best for their interests. 

Tiie aulhoriiy of the chiefs to make the sale can hardly be «loiibted. I 
speak not of authority derived from each Indian ; this was not to he expect- 
ed ; the offer of the Government in 1833 did not contemplate this. 

The chiefs stand in the place of rej)resentatives for their towns ; they 
transact all business for them ; they represent them in councils. A portion 
of this contract the IndiaJis have already executeil, at the same time that 
a contract was entered into for the services of the Indian wariiors. It was 
part of the same conti-act. Tiie negotiations were conducted between the 
same persons ; and the settlement of the land claims was a portion of the 
consideration. The Indians have furnished the warriors stipulated for- 
There can be no question, then, that the chiefs acted for the best, and that 
their* peoj)le will and have sanctioned their acts. 

Tlie instructions of the War Department to (reneral Jesup and Captain 
Page were both kept in view in the stipulations of the contract. The dis- 
sent of any Indian made known before the consummation of the contract, 
his land was excluded from its operation. The money is stipulated to be 
paid to each reservec. This provision was not carried into effect, but the 
alteration was made by the agents of the United States, and ihe Indians. 
Writs for thousands of dollars were in the hands of sheriffs ami constables. 
To place money in the hands of Ihe Indians, would be to o|)en the door for 
oppression and injustice; for both of which, the circumstances of the case 



[ Doc. No. 274. ] 59 

permitted no remedy. The money was therefore paid to the chief, for the 
use of Ills people. The purchasers were not a party to, nor consenting to 
this. It was determined on as best for the Indian. 

The instructions to Greneral Jesup permitted a purchase by any person 
of the lands in dispute, provided the purchaser would take upon himself 
the burden of all valid incumbrances made by the Indian upon the land, 
and the risk against all valid outstanding purchases. The instructions 
permitted the person who had made a contract with an Indian not entitled 
to the land, to procure the confirmation of the title from the Indian enti- 
tled to sell ; the money to be paid to him in the presence of his chief and a 
Government agent. 

The stipulations imposed by the United States in the contract were dic- 
tated by these instructions. 

The risk incurred by the purchasers was prescribed in the first. The 
mode of payment was adopted from the last. Any deviation from 
the letter of the contract was in consequence of advice from the officers 
of the United States, fully justified by what they saw about them. 

They saw the village crowded by those who wished to make their final 
efforts at spoliation and robbery upon the Creek people. They saw writs 
in the hands of officers against Indian women, though the laws of the 
State prohibit the arrest of women. They saw writs and bail required 
of them for thousands, when hundreds were only due. They, therefore, 
recommended that nothing should be paid to the common Indian. They do 
not believe this contract ought to be affected by this advice. 

None of the modes of action that were open to General Jesup could 
have been followed, without a violation of the literal terms of the treaty, 
in the very point in which an alleged violation has occurred. 

Suppose he had adopted the idea of purchasing the lands for the United 
States. The same chiefs would have been consulted. Their statements, 
as to their authority, would never have been questioned. The mode of 
payment would have been identical with that employed in this case. No 
man would have conceived of any other course. Had the lands been 
permitted to remain for disposition by the agents of the United States, it 
would have deprived the "Indians selecting" these tracts of their right 
to convey them to other persons. 

The departure from the treaty arises from the peculiar condition in 
which the Indians were placed. They were forced to emigrate. The Gov- 
ernment required the immediate removal of the Indians ; this was hardly 
in accordance with the treaty. The Indians, anxiously clinging to their 
territory, oppose difficulty after difficulty. They have interest in lands 
covered over with litigation and embarrassments. Deeds are outstanding, 
that have received the approval of an agent of the United States. These 
have been marked for reversal by another agent ; but his report is not ap- 
proved. In the mean time, the Indian has sold his land over again. If 
any of these sales are bona Jide, they ought to be respected. The Indians 
are clamorous for a sale — officers of the United States consent to a sale, 
and purchasers are found who are willing to purchase. Consenting to 
bear the burdens that the Indians bear — consenting that every bona file 
claim should be re'spected, they advance their money. The Indian is sat- 
isfied, and the policy of the Government advanced. If any bona Jide pur- 
chase has been made, that is entitled to priority over this pirc/iasc, can 



60 [ Doc. No. 274. ] 

any sticli purchaser complain of this coTitract ? No ailditifnial burden is 
imposed u|)i»n him by this contract. The only difference to him is, there 
is a difft'rent party to receive the money — a party from whom it cannot 
be taken alter paynient. Fraudulent purchasers may be injured by such 
substitution ; tlie fair and honest purchaser cannot be. I'lie ditlirulty at- 
tending the identificalion of the venilor (Indian) is not an incident to this 
contract, but is a consefjuence of their removal from the country. Strong 
prodf of identity would have been recpiired under any system that might 
have been adtij)ted. Tlie difficulty of procuring this, is not attributable 
to the provisions of the contract. 

I'liC; adequacy of the consideration was settled by the Indians. It is 
dependent ujion circumstances, whether the contract will be beneficial or 
otherwise. There is lisk and uncertaitity. 'I'lie criteiion ado|)ted was 
the price at which the certificates were originally given, deducting 53 per 
cent, fur the contracts that would be determined aejainst (heni. 'I'here was 
no better ciiterion. It was satisfactoiy to the Indians, and agreed to by 
the purchasers. If they could got all the land, the purchasers would make 
enormous profits. No individual suj)pnses that this will be done. Should 
all the lands be held under the certified contracts, there will be a total 
loss. Tliis is not expected. The officers of the United States did all that 
they could do to get the best price. Having done this, they felt they had 
done their duty. 

In conclusion, I will add, that I know of no unfairness, either in the ne- 
gotiation 01- execution of this contract. The whole was fully explained 
to and understood by the chiefs. They were required to consult their peo- 
ple ; they went off for the purpose; declared that their consent was ob- 
tained. They fulfilled all they promised in the negotiation, and ai)peared 
contented with what they had done. There was no persuasion attem|)ted 
by General Jestip, or those acting under him. It was a mattei* that they 
wished to evade all interference with. No promise was held out to the chiefs ; 
and I cannot but believe that the contract is abona fide contract, binding 
«II the ])arties to it. 

I am, very respectfully, gentlemen, your obedient rervant, 

JOUN A. CAMPBELL. 

T. Hartley Crawford, ") ^ „ 

Alfred Balch, Esquires,) (Commissioners, ^-c. 



[ Doc. No. 274. ] 
EXHIBIT A. 



61 



The following is taken from Colonel Hogan's abstract of reversed cases ^ 
and refers to the reservations of which any of the following persons 
are purchasers, to wit : Daniel McDougald, TVilliain Walker, Job 
Taylor, John Feabody, James C. Watson, Peter Harris, and the 
firm or firms loith lohom they are associated in the purchase of res- 
ervations, as described in the said abstract. The marginal num- 
bers of Colonel Hogan's book, the names of the firms, and the 
amount paid for each reservation, are used in this copy ; so that, by 
referring to the corresponding numbers in his book, the name of the 
Indian reservee, and the section, township, and range, so purchased, 
can be iminediately found. 



No. 
9 



1 

2 
4 
5 
18 
45 
54 
58 
71 
75 



55 
65 
78 
81 
120 
150 



139 



15 

18 



Eufala town, on Tallapoosa. 
Thornton, McDougald, and Co. 

Chat-tok-sof-ke town. 
McDougald, Wardswortli, and Co. 

u ^t ti 

n <( «( 

(( <( <( 

Wardswortli, McDougald, and Co. 
Wardswortli and McDougald 
McDougalil, Wardswortli, and Co. 
Wardswortli and McDougald 
McDougald, Wardswortli and Co. 

Wardswortli, McDougald, and Co. 

Luchipoga town. 

Wardswortli and McDougald 



Tallassce. 

McDougald, Hudson, and Thornton 

Tuckabatchee. 

Wardsworth and McDougald 
McDougald and Hall 



S300 00 



£00 


00 


soo 


00 


300 


oo 


200 


00 


SOO 


00 


500 


00 


200 


00 


SOO 


00 


200 


00 


200 


00 



100 00 
150 00 
200 00 
120 00 
100 00 
150 00 



SOO 00 



250 00 
SOO 00 



68 



f Doc. No. 274. ] 

EXHIBIT A— Continued. 



JNo. 










42 


McDougald and Hall 


. 


. 


§450 00 


50 


♦♦ <» . . 


. 


. 


6iJ0 00 


52 


MiJlory, Stone, aj»d McDougald - 


. 


. 


500 00 


65 


WardsNvortli and McDougald 


. 


. 


200 00 


85 


a »* _ . 


• 


. 


200 00 


86 


«» << - - 


. 


. 


100 00 


IK. 


<» »< - - 


' 


. 


200 00 


132 


McDougald, Hall, and Co. 


- 


■ 


400 00 


136 


♦ » •' '« - 


. 


- 


600 00 


154 


McDougald and Hall 


. 


- 


400 00 


174 


Wai'dswortii, McDougald, and Co. 


. 


- 


100 00 


183 


.t n a 


. 


- 


100 00 


187 


>< a it 


. 


. 


200 00 


196 


McDougald and Hall 


. 


. 


500 00 


216 


Wardsworth, McDougald, and Co. 


. 


. 


200 00 


218 


t( (« n 


. 


. 


150 00 


223 


• ( <( a 


. 


. 


200 00 


239 


McDougald and Hall 


- 


. 


400 00 


248 


Wardswortli, McDougald, and Co. 


. 


. 


200 00 


249 


« a 


- 


. 


100 00 


252 


Wardswortli and McDougald 


. 


. 


200 00 


275 


<< it . 


. 


. 


100 00 


288 


(( <( 


- 


. 


100 00 


331 


McDougald and Hall 

T/doblhlocco. 






500 GO 


41 


MrRoby, Stone, and McDougald - 


, 


„ 




67 


McBryde and McDougald 


. 


- 


50 00 


70 


Tliornton, McDougald, and Co. 


. 


. 


400 00 


73 


Thornton, McDougald, Mills, and Co. 
Autauga. 






300 00 


6 


Thornton, McDougald, and Skylock 


. 


_ 


400 00 


49 


it n tt 


. 


. 


350 00 


52 


McRoby, McDougald, and Co. 
Tallassee. 






400 00 


169 


Coker, Walker, and McDougald - 
Tuckabatcfiee. 


- 


- 


300 00 


9 


Thornton, Walker, and Co. 


_ 


_ 


100 00 


20 


Thornton and Walker 


. 


. 


100 00 


33 


ti t( _ . 


. 


. 


200 00 


34 


it « . . 


. 


. 


200 00 


119 


'• " - . 


- 


- 


100 00 



[ Doc. No. 274. ] 

EXHIBIT A— Continued. 



63 



rso. 

197 
287 
289 
333 
340 
349 
368 



16 

27 
29 

42 



42 
49 
68 



6 
31 

32 
40 
42 
43 



29 



Thornton, Walker, and Co. 

Do do 

Do do 

Thornton and Walker 
Thornton, Walker, and Co. 
Walker and McDougald - 
Thornton, Walker, and Co. 

Tlilobthlocco. 

Thornton, Walker, and Co. 
William Walker and McDougald - 
Thornton, Walker, and Co. 
Walker and McDougald - 
Walker, TUornton, and McDougald 

Clewalla. 

Walker and Thornton 

Do do - - 

Thornton and Walker 

Talmachussa, 

Thornton and Walker 
Thornton, Walker, and Co. 

Do do - - 

Do do - - 

Do do - 

Do do - - 

Ottissee. 

Walker, Thornton, ^nd Co. 
do 
do 
do 
do 
do 
do 
do 
do 
do 
do 



5 


Do 


10 


Do 


22 


Do 


25 


Do 


30 


Do 


32 


Do 


35 


Do 


60 


Do 


64 


Do 


86 


Do 



•Autauga. 



Walker and Thornton, 



200 


00 


200 


00 


100 


00 


50 


00 


640 


00 


100 


00 



300 00 
55 00 
55 00 

100 00 
60 00 



100 00 
120 00 
100 00 



100 00 
100 00 
400 00 
100 00 
100 00 
50 00 



100 


00 


150 


00 


100 


00 


100 


GO 


250 


00 


250 


00 


100 


00 


100 


00 


200 


00 


100 


00 


100 


GO 



IGO GO 



64 



[ Doc. No. 274. ] 
EXHIBIT A— Continued. 



No. 


lullassee. 








14 


Iliidson and Pcabody 


, 




^400 00 


15 


Do do 


- 




400 00 


18 


Thornton, Pcabody, and Reeves 


. 


" 


400 00 


fiO 


Do do 


- 




400 00 


21 


Do do 


. 




400 00 


23 


Hudson and Peabody 


. 




400 00 


24 


Do do 


. 




400 00 


26 


Do do - - 


. 




400 00 


150 


Do do - - 


. 




400 00 


166 


Thornton, Peabody, Reeves, and Co. 


. 




400 00 


170 


Hudson and Poabody 


- 




400 00 


171 


Tlioiiilon, Pcabody, Reeves, and Co, 


. 




400 00 


180 


Hudson and Peabody 

Tiiskegee. 






400 00 


21 


Thornton, Reeves, Peabody and Co. 


- 


• 




400 00 




Thlobllilocco. 








3 


John Peabody and Co. 


. 


. 


350 00 


4 


Do do - - 


. 


- 


400 00 


19 


Do do 


. 


- 




500 00 


23 


Do do - - 


. 


- 




400 00 


25 


Do do - - 


- 


- 




400 00 


46 


Do do - - 


. 


- 




350 00 


50 


Do do - - 
»9utavga. 








400 00 


22 


Peabodv, Watson, and Worsham - 


_ 


. 




500 00 


23 


bo do 


. 


- 


50 00 


36 


Peabody, Watson, and Co. 

Tallassee. 






400 00 


34 


Woodland and Watson 


- 


- 


500 00 




Enjula, Tallapoosa* 










53 


Webb, Taylor, and Co. - 

Chat-tok-snJ-kc. 


" 


" 




250 00 


37 


Wel)b, Taylor, and Co. - 


_ 


. 




150 00 


40 


J. Tn}lor and Co. 


- 


- 




100 00 



[ Doc. No. 274. ] 
EXHIBIT A— Continued. 



65 





Tuckabatchee. 










No. 














16 


Tawer and Taylor 


. 


- 


- 




Sioo 00 


63 


Do do 


- 


. 


- 




150 00 


72 


Tawer, Taylor, and Co. 


. 


. 


- 




100 00 


75 


Tawer and Taylor 


- 


. 


. 




100 00 


107 


Do do 

Chat-tok 


-sof-ke. 








100 00 


27 


Tawer and Taylor, 


_ 


- 


- 


. 


50 00 


28 


Do do 


- 


- 


- 


- 


100 (10 


49 


I. Taylor and Co. 


- 


- 


- 


- 


100 00 


50 


Tawer, Taylor, and Co. 


- 


- 


- 


- 


150 00 


61 


Do do 


- 


- 


- 


- 


350 00 


63 


Do do 


- 


- 


- 


- 


350 00 


65 


Do do 


- 


• 


- 


- 


350 00 


68 


Do do 


- 


- 


- 


- 


100 00 


70 


Do do 


- 


- 


. 


- 


400 00 


72 


Do do 


- 


- 


- 


_ 


450 00 


80 


Taylor and Tawer 


- 


. 


- 


- 


100 00 


112 


Tawer, Tayloi", and Co. 


- 


. 


. 


. 


400 00 


114 


Do do 


- 


- 


- 


. 


150 00 


117 


Do do 


. 


. 


. 


. 




128 


Do do 


- 


- 


- 


- 


150 00 




Tuckabatchee. 










337 


P. Harris 


• 


- 


- 


- 





Green's, near Tuskegee, Alabama, 

JVovember 30, 1836. 
I certify that the above is a true and correct copy, taken from Coh)nel 
Hngan's abstract of reversed cases in Dr. Mcllenry's district, now on the 
flies of tliis ofJice. 

JNO. M. WYSE, 
Secretary td Commissioners. 
5 



66 [ Doc. No. 274. J 

Statr of Alabama, ) 

TuUapoosa coHnlij. 5 

This indiiitiii (', made and concluded at Jlie town of Tallassce, in the coun- 
ty and State alnresaid, on the 2Sth day of August, A. D. 1836, between 
tlie United States of America, of the first part ; and Opoilie Yoholo, Mini 
Blue, Tnckabatche xMicco, Little Doctor, and Jim Boy, chiefs of the Creels 
trihc of Indians, atid James C. Watson, J'^dw aid Haniick, William M'alk- 
er i\. Company, IVtei" C Ilarr-is, and .[ohn I'cahody, of the third part, 
uitnessetli : That \Nltei'eas, by a tieaty between the United States of Amer-- 
ca ami Uie Creek tribe of Indiatis, ratified in tlie year of oui* Lord 1«32, 
eacli head of a family belonging to said tribe became entitled to one half a 
section of land, whicii was subse«^uently allotted accoi-ding to the same: 
and whereas, by the same treaty, it was provided that no sale should be 
valid, unless the contract sln-uld meet with the approbation of an agent of 
the United States, and confirmation by the President thereof : and where- 
as the parlies of the seciuid part allege, o!i behalf of individuals of the said 
tribe, that frauds have been perpetrated upon the holders of land under 
the said treaty, whereby their titles ha\e become involve<l with dilliculty, 
their lights jeopardized, and confidence in their secuiity impaired : and 
whereas investigations have taken place without lesults, ami they are 
about to leave the lands ceded, for their homes in the west : To tlie end of 
settling all their business in this country, of transferring from themselves 
the burden of litigation, and of obtaining sonietliing foi* their claims pro- 
])ortioned to their value, and at the same time tt) make a provision f(»r the 
fair and bona fide purcliasers from the people of their tribe, they have ad- 
vised their j)et)i)le liolding saitl claims to accede to a genei'al disposition of 
them, and have obtaineil their consent to remise, release, and forever quit 
claim (on the part of all and each of them) to the parties of the third part, and 
each of them, of all Hieii- right, title, interest, claim, and demand to all the 
tracts and ])arcels of land, situate, lying, and being in that part of the terri- 
tory ceded in the treaty aforesaid, compi-ised w ithin the district of lands iti 
which R. W. >TcHenry was the certifying agent, which has formed the 
subject of contest before the agents of tlie United States, and which have 
either been certified and marked for reversal, or which have been sold 
and certified without authority in the agents of the United States to wit- 
ness sai<l sales, or certify said contracts, (the same being the cases con- 
tained in the r-eports of the investigating agents :) subject, however, to the 
rcstiictioiis imjiosed by tlie party of the first i)ait, as ftJlows : 

" 1st. Tiiat the title hereby obtained, or which may be obtained in pur- 
suance of this contract, shall not interfere with liie rights of any individ- 
ual who has made a prior valid contract with the rightful claimant of said 
lands, (whether the same has been certified or not,) or any jiart thereof; 
but the respective (laims(if necessary for settlement) shall be investigated 
by an agent appointed by the Presidentof the United States, and the ratifi- 
cation of the Piesident shall be necessaiy to the perfection of the titles. 

•♦ Provided, nevertheless, that for the ascertainment of the fairness 
and validity of any claim, as well as Ibr the protection (d' the |)arties of the 
third part, they shall be entitled to the benefit of the same rules that the 
Indians would have been entitled to but for this contract, under the instruc- 
tions of the War Department. 

"2d. That when any contract shall be preferred by the said agent upon 
investigation, the panics of the third part shall be entitled tu the same 



[ Doc. No. 274. ] 67 

scctnity for the consideration as the Indian would have had but for this 
contract ; jjrovided, if the amount paid into the liands of the agent of the 
United States sliall exceed, on any pairel of land, the pi'o rata valuation 
made in tliis cotitiact, then one half of said overplus shall be J'clained by 
the agent for the Indian located upon said reserve, or, if dead, his heii's. 

" 3d. That the money hereafter stipulated to be paid, shall he paid to 
the Indian enlitled to the land, in j)reseuce of the cliief, and an officer of 
the United States ; and until such j)ayment be made, it shall be deposited 
witli the certifying agents of the district. The payment of whicii shall 
be a consummation of this contj-act. 

" 4tli. That if any one Indian holding any parcel of land herein con- 
veyed, sliall I'cfuse t(» carry into effect (he provisions of this conti-act, 
in that case a pro rata allowance ;ipon the consideration herein stipulated, 
shall be made to the parties of the tiiird part : provided this consent shall 
be given before the consummation of this contract. 

"otii. That all those lands, which have not been sold, including (hose 
where the indian has died before sale, shall he taken at a valuation to be 
made hy the persons who may be ap])ointed by the agent of the United 
States, who sliall finally close the arrangements provided for in this con- 
tract, and the treaty : jirovided, that this shall not refer to any claims em- 
braced in previous ai-ticles of this contract : and provided further, that 
valid titles can be ohtaitied therefor. 

"The parties of the third j)art agree to receive the cotneyance herein- 
before made, subject to all the cotulilions and stipulations lierein contained, 
atid vvill pay theiefor the sum of seventy. five thousand dollars; one-half to 
be paid upon the sealing of these presents, t(j the agent of the United 
States who may be appointed to receive the same ; and one-half in four 
months, at P\)rt Gibson, in the State of Arkansas. 

♦' In testimony whereof, I, John A. Campbell, appointed by Major 
General Thomas S. Jesup, commanding Southern army, as agent of 
the United States to execute the same, &.c. 

"JOHN A. CAMPBELL. 

" In testimony whereof, we have hereunto set our hands, and affixed our 
seals, the day and date above written. 

Opothe Yoholo, liis x mark. 

Mad Blue, his x mark. 

Tuckabatclie-Micco, his x mark. 
Tustenugge Chopco, his x mark. 
Little Doctor, his x mark. 

Jim Boy, his x mark. 

J. C. Watson, 
Witnesses : Edward Hanrick, 

John Page, William Walker, 

(jai)t. Supt. Creek Removal. Peter C. Harris. 

J. F. Lane, John Peabody. 

Copt. U. S. Army. 
B. Marshall, Interpreter. 

*' Sanctioned by me, subject to the ratification of the President of the 
United States, August 28, 1836. 

''THOMAS S. JESUP, 
" Maj. Gen. Commanding ^rmy of the South. 



68 [ Doc. 'So. 274. ] 

" 'I'liis rnntr;irt sliail rtpjily to the towns only of Consawdn's, Tiicka- 
l)at(li{'*s, Eiilala's, Ki;ilii;;i*s. Cljattossoriciiis, Koho-matsUa-catcli-k;!, 
Liichip-'S^a, Sou£;aliatcli('t', Tallassee, 'riiskc^cc, Clicliaw tow n on Eiilala 
(MCI k, 'J'lilobtliliKCo, (Jim Boy's.) Clewalla, 'I'alinarlmssec, Towarsa, 
Ottcsa. Autauga. Tlic cliit'l's bel'ore stafi-d, »!cclaring tliat tlicy Iiad no 
advice or consent from the otliei- towns. August 28. 183G. 

JOHN A. CAMPBELL. 

'• riic Tallassee cliief declared, when lie .signed the contract, that he 
had not the assent of iiis jjcoplc to the act." 

THOMAS S. JESUP. 

•♦ We do hereliy acknowledge to have rereived from John Page, agent 
of the United States, wh(» was appointed hy Major General 'j'honias S. 
Jesup to iecei\e the same IVom the parties of tlic third part, Jiientioned 
witiiin, thirty-seven thousand and five hundred dollars in cash, and the 
note «)!" the parties of the; third pait. payable at lour months, loi- the same 
sum. That this has been done at the instance and ctmsent of our people 
interested herein, and for distribution among them whose rights have been 
disj)osed of. — August 29th, 1836. 

Done in our presence : 

Opothe YijIioIo, his x mark. 

Th. W. Bateman, Mad Blue, his x mark. 

Lieut. J. Insp. and Dis. Jlgent. Tuckabatrhee Micco his x niark. 

Barent Dubois, Little Doctor, his x mark. 

Jlssistant Jlgevt. Jim Boy, his x mark. 

James L. Alexantler, Tustenugge Chopco, his x mark. 

^issistaiit .Igent. Tusconer Uadjo, his x mark. 

Colchc Emarthia, his x mark. 

In the matter of the memorial of James C. Watson, Edward Hanrick, 
and others, and the counter-memorial of Ware, Dougherty, and others, 
dc|M'nding before the commissioners under the Creek treaty, ui)on the 
order of said commissioners, Thomas H. Crawford and Alfred IJalcli, 
I have this day proceeded to take, hy consent of both jiarties to saiil me- 
morial and counter-memorial, the depositions of the following witnesses, 
to he read in evidence in the said cases, to wit : 

George Cloiigh. a witnessfor the counter-memorialist, deposeth and saith : 
That H proi)ositi<in was made to the chiefs to take all the disjnited lands in 
Mclleiiry's district at valuation. Opothe Yoholo said he was w illing to ac- 
cede to the j)roposition. and an agreement was made to meet the same even- 
in"' in Tallasseeto confirm the arrangement, but the chiefs did not meet. De- 
ponent says that he made another proposition to the chiefs to take the land in 
a body at Si SO. 000. Deponent tlif)Ught. at the time the jjroposition was 
made, that the lands which had been the subject of investigation, without in- 
cluding the i)ie-eniption to unsold lands and the lands located to dead Itnli- 
ans, was worth two hundred thousand dollai-s. 'I'hese propositions were 
made a few days before the contract with Watson, l!anrick. and others, was 
ma(!e. Dfjionrnt fui-ther states, that alter the (xecution of the contract 
with Watson, Hanrick, and others, and a day or two before the Indians 



[ Doc. No. 274. J 69 

belonging to the Tiickabatchee ^nwn had left their camps to move wcst- 
wardly, he, tliis dejioiient, was at tlie square established near the camps, 
and vvlieie public meetings were usually held ; that the Itidians belongitjg 
to the town had generally assembled there, and held a talk, and he was 
informed that the subject ot'the talk w'as about i-eceiving the money which 
the chiefs had gotten for the disj)uted landfj. The Indians stated tliat they 
had not sold tiieir lands to the chiefs, and the cisiefs had no right to sell 
them in the way they did ; tliat the lands were their own, and they would 
sell them themselves, and therefore they refused to take the money. De- 
ponent states that he knows but little of the Indian language; that tlic 
talk above referred to was explained to him by a negro interpreter, who 
had been in his employ for some time, and in whom he has confidence, 
never having detected him in making false interpretations. 

Cross-examined. Deponent says that he and his company would give 
them one hundred and fifty tliousand dollars for the lands above referred 
to. He further stated, that the company consisted of himself, his brother, 
O. K. Freeman, Mr. Samuel K. Hodges, and Colonel Seaborn Jones. 
Deponent was in Tallassee on the 28th of August, and understood a Jiego- 
tiation was going on for making a contract for the land, bur he did not make 
his proposition to General Jesup or Colonel Campbell. Dej)onent did not 
see the money ])aid at all ; thinks there wei-e about two hundred Indians in 
the scjuaie, at tlie time of the meeting referred to in his answers to the 
direct investigation. The Indians disperssd immediately after his inter- 
])reter told him they had refused to take the money. Is not certain whethci* 
General Jcsup or Colonel Campbell was present, but thinks Captain 
Page was. The interpreter refeired to is a slave. 

Re-examined. States that, from his knowledge of tlie Indians, there 
were few, if any, of the Indians from the up[)er town, in McHenry's dis- 
trict, aboutTallassee, or about thecamps, when thenegotiation wasgoing un. 
He states that between one-iialf and three-foui'ths of the Indians he saw 
about Tallassee were from the Tuckabatchee town, atid those below it ; he 
does not know where the others were from. 

GEORGE CLOUGil. 

Sworn to and subscribed before me, this I6th day of November, 1836. 

WILLIAM M. CHAPMAN, J. P. 

Julian S. Devereux, another witness for the counter-memorialists, 
deposes and says: I understand very little of the Indian lattguage ; I was 
at the s(piare at 0[)otlie Volioln's camp, on the day that the Indians set out 
for Arkansas. Tuckabatchee Micco, and other Indians, were there ; the 
white men were oi'deied to go away by a United States officer, unless 
they had business, I told the otficer (who I think was Captain or Lieu- 
tenant Lauderdale) that I could not know wiiether I had business, unless I 
could be informed what the Indians were assembled tiiere for. I was first 
told that they were going to enioll tlie names of Indians to g(» to Floi-ida, 
and I was told also that they were going to pay the annuity to the Indians. 
I saw them call U[> two or three Indians, w liose lands myself atid Mr, 
Thompson had purchased. I theii rose, and told them that, if they were 
going t(» pay Ihose Indians any money for their lands, I wisised thesn fo ask 
them if they had not sold to us. Dubois tliets got up and said it would take 



70 [ Doc. No. 274. ] 

a week to get (liroii^Ii the hu^ine'-s ; and I)- went off one way. and Tiicka- 
lialcliee Micro juiollier, and tlie IndLiiis gi-nerallv dis|)er-sed. Tiickabatcliee 
Micco liad bank notes in liis hat: hou nuich there was I am nnahle to 
state. I wast(dd hy some |iei-.son, whom I took ;o be a Unitrd States 
ollicer, that the Indians were assembh'd thereto be paid for their land. ( 
was also inlormetl tliat the ollicer above alluded to was named Landeidalc. 
Mr. Ed\\ai«I llanrick was |irt'sent at tlic time ami place above mer)tione<l, 
and was engaged in maki?ig calnilations tn see how much each Indian was 
cntithd to out of the money. It was late in tlie evening : the wagons of 
th." emigiating party had starte<l. I remained till dark, and saw no nn)iiev' 
paid to the Indians. I am interested in eighteen re>er'ves, which have 
been inai ked on the books lor reversal; but the purchases above alluded to 
were made subseijuent to the sairl reversal, before the coniract between 
General Watson and others, atnl the Indian chiefs. 

JULIAN S. UEVEUKUX. 

Saoiii to and subscribed before me, this iClh day of November, 18S6. 

WILLIAM M. CHAPMAN, X P. 

Major 'I'homas J. Abbott, another witjiess for the rounter-memoiialists, 
deposes and says : 1 was served with notices on the 29th of August last, at 
Tallassee, a ropy of which notices is hereunlo annexed. Tiie first no- 
tice was signed by General Watson and olliers; and w h<'n it was served on 
nic, I |-e|)lied that I could not recognise tin' au(ht)rity of those individuals, 
but if they would bring an order IVom the pioper autiioi'ity 1 sliould ie- 
sjject it. I was then served witii l!ie other notice or order from General 
Jesiip, which I obeyed. At the time the notices were served, 1 was en- 
gaged in reitif'ying contracts which had been marked for reversal, and to 
which the pi-evious puichasvrs were about to make a je|in(|uishment in 
writing; and in which class of cases I was authuriz<Ml by my insti'uctions 
to certify. 'I'here was at that time before me a rase of the above character, 
and I understood theie weie a nund)er cd' other cases thai were coming be- 
iore me of the same kind: tlu'i-e were a number of Indians as well as wliite 
persons j)resent : lite rocnn was large, antl much crowded. Some time after 
*l)<' making of tlie large contract, Jim Boy came belo»e me for the purjjosc 
o! idiMitifying an Indiaji ; when he was asked by some person how he came 
to sell so fnuch land ? he rejdied. that if he had done so, he did not do it 
knovsingly, and tliat he had applied to have his name erased fi-oin the in- 
strument, and !iad been iidoiined tliat it had been doti(\ This conversa- 
tir)n was '-ar-ried on thn'Ugh an intei'preter — I thitd<. David Barnard. Jin» 
B'>y understands the English language ])relty well ; but I do not think 
sulliciently well to understaml so coinpiicrated an instrument as the con- 
tract, if it was read to him in the words in which it is written. 

M^jor Abbott contimuMl : Opothe Yoholo. 'ruckal)atchee Miccf», Mad 
Blue, and IJltle Doctoi". ai-«' an)ong tiie ninety principal chiefs, as recog- 
niscil liy the fi-eaty, as belonging to t!ie nation and belonging to the Tnck- 
abatchee town. 

He has always considered that Neah Micco, Opotlie Yoholo, and 'I'nsk- 
rnawhaw jios^ess the mo^t infliuMice among the |)eople of the Creek nation, 
ami that each other chief having a location of a mile sipiaie iindei" tiic 
treaty, forty-one (4 1)of wliich ciiiels, by a reference to the register of lo- 



[ Doc. No. 274. ] 71 

cation, appear to be in McHenry's districf, arc upon an cqnalify in point 
of grade and rank, and, so Car as lie knows, in point ofantliority. Major 
Abbott lias resided among tbe Creek Indians since 1832; btit is un- 
acquainted as ro tiie extent of the authority of the principal chiefs. He 
considered Tuskenawhaw and Opothe Yoholo as possessing more per- 
sonal influence than any other chiefs of the town. But as to their legal 
autliority he knows not. Twenty of tlie said ninety chiefs are to be found 
enrolled on the register, as belojiging to the Tuckabatchee town. The 
interlineation of the words ''among the ninety'* "as recognised by tbe 
treaty" "as belonging to the nation" is admitied. 

THOMAS J. ABBOTT. 

Sworn to and subscribed before me, this I6tli November, 1836. 

WILLIAM M. CHAPMAN, J. P. 

WildridgeTliompson.a witness for the counter-memorialists, deposethand 
saitli : That a short time after the contract with Watson and others was 
executed, through David Barnard, an intelligent half-breed, who understands 
the Creek and English languages, (considered, also, in his neighborhood, 
a correct and faithful interpretei-.) held a conversation with Jim Boy, 
who stated that he had signed tlie contract, but at the time he did 
so, he did not understand that he was selling his [)eople's lands and 
after he became to understand it, he said that he applied to Wm. Walker, 
of Macon county, (alluding, in the understanding of witness, to William 
Walker, one of the j)aj'ties to the contract,) to have his name erased, or 
taker) off of the contract, and stated that he was told by Walker that he 
would take bis name oft", and afterwards that NValkerhad told liiu) that he 
bad done so. He also, Thompson, stated that he had asked Jim Boy, 
tlii'ougfj the same interpi-eter, whether his peoj»le had authorized him to 
sell* heir lands. He told him that they had not: and that he has since conversed 
througii iiiterpreters, in whom he had coniidence, with a good many Indi- 
ans of the Tuckabatchee and Jim Coy's town, wliose lands were included in 
tliis contract, who stated that they had not autliorized their chiefs to sell 
tiieir lands, and that, when they wanted to sell them, they would sell 
them themselves. Mr. Tiiompson (witness) says that he is interested in 
some eighteen contracts marked for reversal, and included in the contracts 
which were purchased subsequent to their being marked for reversal. 

Witness, from his knowledge of the country in Jim Boy*stown, believes 
the iialf sections of that town to be worth, on an avei-age, a thousand dol- 
lars each. Witness has resiiled in the Creek country since 1830, and is 
acquainted with the quality of the aforesaid lands. 

WILDRIDGE C. THOMPSON. 

Sworn to and subscribed before me, this 16th day of Novemiier. 1836. 

WILLJAM M. CHAPMAN, J. P. 

Job Taylor, a witness on behalf of the memorial for the contract, de- 
posetli as follows : That he received a short time after a poi-tion of the emi- 
grating party left tlieir camps, from Winowva. the chief of the Cliotok-saufk 
town, included within lln; district of Dr. McHenry, between five and ten 
th(?usand dollars, and was directed to pay tiic same over to the indivi<Iual 
Indians of said town, which he did. The sliare of each indiat! amounted 
to SI^27 50. Deponent understood from WinoNvva that it was a part of 



72 [ Doc. No. 274. ] 

the money reci'ived for the lands to Watson, Ilaniick, and others. The 
number of Indians paid was, as nea!- as the dejionent lerollects, between 
thirty-seven and thirty-eight. Deponent was acting as the agent of the 
emigrating party. Witness has umlerstuoii that the same parties wlio ma«Ic 
the contract, were interested in the emigrating contract: he is interested in 
some forty or forty-five contracts marUeil foi- reversal. Tiiei'e is no un- 
dei'standitig between this (K'ponent and any of the parties to said contract, 
that his chiiins shouhl he arranged. 

Witness has heaid some of the parties observe t\\;\t many of the con- 
tracts would be atnicably arranged. Deponent knows that Walker and 
AVatson are interested in contracts which are marked for reversal, on the 
gi-()iHi(l thai (lie rigiit Indian was j)ersonated. V»itness believes that must 
of his contracts are niaiked lor reveisal on the same grounds. Deponent 
does not know that in any of the contracts of Watst)n or A^aiker the 
wrong Indian was intioduced, but believes the agent thought that was the 
case. M itness does not kn»)W' whether ^^ are, Dougherty, in. Co. have 
any contiacts marked for reversal on that ground. Witness went to Co- 
lumbus, in part to make some airangement for his contracts marked for re- 
veisal, but he had other business thei-e. lie made the apjilication to the 
jtarties interested. I'lirough the medium of others, he understood that the 
claims generally would be amicably arranged, and that he might rest sat- 
isfied, uv somelhiMg to that amount. Witness says that from wliat passed 
between him and General Watson, at Taliassee, the day after the contract 
was signed, he believed his interests would be resj;ected on the same 
jjiinciple that others would. 

JOB TAYLOR. 

Sworn to and subscribed before me, this 16th day of November, 1836. 

JULIAN S. DEVERELX, J. P. 

Alabama, 1 

Jluain I'inintii. J 

I. William M. Chapman, a justice of the peace, in and for tlie county 
and State aforesaid, do hei-eby certify, that I proceeded, on the l6th day of 
November, in the year of our Lord one thousand eight hundred and thirty- 
six, to take the aforesaid depositions, with the exception of those of Mr. 
Job Taylor, at the house of John Guin. in said county and State : and I 
hereby certify that the said witnesses signed tiie said (le[)ositioiis w ith their 
own proper hands, and that Ihcy and each of them were duly sworn by 
me to tlie truth of the same. 

Given under inv hand and seal tliis 17th of November, 1836. 

WILLIAM M. CHAPMAN, J. P. 



I 



Taixassee, Alabama, 

Jlugust^g, 1836. 
Sin : You will |)lease take notice, the undersigned and company have 
entere<l into and close<l a contract with the United States and tlie Ci-eek 
Indians, within the district known as Di-. McHenry's district, whereby we 
have purchased and obtaitied the entire [right] of all the Indians to all 
disputed claims, as well as those yet open and never sold ; all undei* tlie 



[ Doc. No. 274. ] 73 

sanction and approval of tl)e commanding general of the Soutliern army. 
You will, therefore, please desist or decline any further certifying without 
our consent. Respectfully, 

J. C. WATSON, 
EDWARD HAN RICK, 
PETER C. HARRIS. 
Major Thomas J. Abbott, 

Certifying agent. 



Headquarters, Army United States, 

Tallnssec, Jlngust 29, 1836. 
Sir : The chiefs of the Creek nation having disposed of their disputed 
land claims to Messi's. Watson, Walker, Hanrick, and others, for the sum 
of seventy-five thousand dollais, suhject to the ratification of the Presi- 
dent, no cases of that description will be certified after the receipt of 
this order. 

THOS. s. jesup, 

Major General S. Armtj. 
Maj. T. J. Abbott, 

Certifying agent. 



State of Alabama, ") 

Macon County. J 
Deposition of Thomas S. Woodward, a witness in the matter of the mem- 
orial and counter-memorial of James C. Watson, James S. Calhoun and 
others, depending before Thomas H. Crawford and Alfred Balch, com- 
missioners, taken befoie Abraham B. Jackson, justice of the peace, at 
Youngblood's tavern, in the town of Tuskegee, Macon county, on Mon- 
day the 21st of November, 1836, between the hours of 12 a. m., and 5 p. 
m., in conformity with an order of said commissioners. 

Tiie said witness being duly sworn, deposeth and saith, as follows : I 
have seen Jim Boy frequently since the making of the large contract be- 
tween General Watson and others atid the Indian chiefs, and on tlie march 
to Florida and at Appalachicola I conversed with him about said contract, 
and he informed me that he understood the said contract as including all the 
disputed lands in his town ; that lie had received seven thousand five bundled 
dollars, n'^ tliv' iH'oportion which his town was entitled to, out of the money 
j»ai<] by said Watson and others. Jim Boy also requested me to tell his peo- 
})lenot to listen to persons who should come among them for the purpose of 
making them <liscontented with said conti*act, and that he would take care 
of their money, and would keep it for them until they quit the country ; and 
the reason why he had not paid it to them was, that he knew that the officers 
would take it away from them. I also know that tiie Indians in Jim Boy's 
town have received other large sums of money foi* lands in said town, the 
contracts for which lands have been marked for reversal, and which the In- 
dians do not consider as fraudulent cowtracts ; and I consider the money 
which has been previously paid to said town for lands, together with the 
proportion received by Jim Boy out of the money paid by Watson and 



74 [ Doc. No. 274. ] 

others, as a fair equivalent for the lands in said town, in the way that In- 
dian lands have usually sold ; and I am well acquainted w ith the (jualiiy of 
the lands iti said tow ti. I nlso know that a lai-£^e piojioition <»(' the Indians 
hclunging to Jim Boy's town weie present when the negotiation of said 
contract was goin,^ on, including all the principal men of said town. I was 
])resent at the time the contract was closed, and heard Julian b. Dmereux 
say, that if they would pay him a cei-tain amount, (whicli amount I <lo not 
recollect,) he would l)e in favor of the contract : hut if they would not j)ay 
him, he would have it broken up if he could. 1 am )n)t a member of the 
compatiy who njade the said cotitrart, noi* inteiested in the same: hut am 
interested in several tracts of latnl, theconti-acts for which had been marked 
for reversal previous to the execution of said contract, hut which I exjiect 
to be able to settle with said company ; I am also well ac«|uaiiited with 
the common Indians in Jim Boy's town, and know thiit they look nj) to 
him, and are governed by him in most in^ilances, in the transaction of 
business. 

Questions by the counsel of Robert Ware, \>'illian» Dougherty, James S. 
Calhoun, and Truman Lumson, to witness : 

Have you any contracts in Dr. McHeni-y's district marked for reversal? 

Answer. That he has an inter-est in some contracts marked for reversal. 

Question as above. Are you not a brother-in-law to Geiiei-al James C. 
Watson? 

Answer. 'J'hat he is the brother in law of Watson. 

Question as above. Had you not a direct or indirect intei-est in the 
said contract at the time it was first made, or subsequently thereto ? 

Answer. I had not any ititerest, neither have 1 any at this time, noi* 
have I had. 

Question as above. Have you not pledged yourself to snj)port this con- 
tract as far as in your |)ower ? 

Answer. That I have not pledged myself to support said contract, but 
believe it to be the best arrangement for both whites and Indians that 
could be made. 

Question as above. Have you not received satisfactory assurances, or 
some understanding, that youi- claims should he respected in said contract ? 

Answer. That 1 have leceived no satisfactory assui-ances that my claims 
should be respected nn)re than the claims of other persons : that if I can 
pi'ove my claims just and honest, they will be res])ected ; that said con- 
Tractoi-s have never- made any pledges to this witness, no farther- than he 
has heard the member-s of said conrpany say that all just claims should be 
respected. 

Question as above. Do you believe Gener-al Daniel McDougald a j)ar- 
ty to said conti-act ? This rjuestion ohjecteil to by tlie opposite counsel. 

Answer-. That he believes him as likely to be a j)aity as any pvrson 
whose name is not inser-ted in said contract. 

Question as above. Have you nut r-eceived divers communications vei-- 
bal or- written, fr-cnn General Watson, oi- some of the comj)any of said con- 
tract, since the matter came belbr-e tin*, cornmissicmers ? 

Answer. I do not recollect of r-eceiving arry wr-itten communications 
fi-om the said ccnnjrany, birt have IVerpiently been iii conijrany witli Watson, 
Harris, ami Peahody. since saiil contract was made, and have heard them 
conver-se irr r-elatif)n to said contract. 

Question as above. What was the pui-poi-t of said conversation ? 



[ Doc. No. 274. ] 75 

Answer. That said Watson, Harris, and Peabody observed, that said 
contract was a just and fair one ; tliat tiie proposition was first made by 
tlie ( hiefs and General Jesnj) to enter into said contract; and that the 
proposition was not made by the said Watson, Harris, and Peabody, to the 
Indians. 

Question as above. Ai'e not some of the pai-ties to the contract gener- 
ally understood to be those j)ersons who have fraudulently personated tlie 
right Indian before the certifying agent, or caused them to be so person- 
ated ? Question objected to by opj)osite counsel. 

Answer. 1 do not understand that the parties are generally understood 
to have personated Indians. It will be found on the books of the investi- 
gating agents that contracts certified to Peaboby & Co. have been reversed. 

THOMAS S. WOODWARD. 

Taken, subscribed, and sworn to before me, this 2 1st day of November, 
1836. 

ABRAHAM B. JACKSON, J. F. 

Dejjosition of Thomas S. Woodward, continued : 

Question as above. Were you not in consultation with the parties to 
said contract, upon the subject of said contract, previous to the same being 
closed ? 

Answer. That he has been in company with said individuals when the 
said contract was the subject of conversation. 

Question as above, liid you not insist that you should be a paity to 
said contract belbre it was consummated? 

Answer. I did not; but, after tlie contract was made, I made applica- 
tion ibr an interest, but was refused an interest, because I would not ad- 
vance the sum of money required. 

Question as abo\e. Do you not know tiiat the annuity money to be 
paid to the Indians was pledged for the refunding of the money if said 
contract is not confirmed? 

Answer. I do not; but I heard one of the company to said contract 
say that, if the same was not confirmed, they would lose their money, if 
Government did not pay it to them. 

Question as above Weieyou in Hurlin's tavern, in the town of Tal- 
las.see, in consultation with the purchasers above mentioned, in examining 
books, the price to be given foi' said lands, or any other matters relating 
to said c(nitract previous to its execution ? 

Answer. That he was in Hurlin's tavern, in company with the members 
of said contract, at the lime they wei-e examining liogan's list of reversed 
cases; they were consulting as to the pi-ice they shotild give to said Indians 
foi* said lands, and said purchasers would occasionally ask witness the 
value of certain tracts of land. 

Question by counsel for Watson and others: 

Do you know tliat General Daniel McDougald is a party to said con- 
tract ? ' 

Answer, 'i'hat he does not. 

THOMAS S. WOODWARD. 

Taken, subscribed, and swon: to, before me this 21st day of November, 

1 n r* /? 

A. B.JACKSON, J. P. 



76 [ Doc. No. 274. ] 

Deposition of Tolm Page, a witness on the part of James C. Watson and 
otlici's, in tlio case of a conti'act between tliem and tlie ofticers of tlie 
Goveininent and certain chiefs of the Creek nation. 

I was at Tallassce in the month of August last, when General Jesup, 
in behalf of United States, and ceitain cliiefs of the Upj)er Creeivs, made 
a contract with James C. Watson and others, for selling the disputed or 
fraudulent claiinH in Di-. Henry's disttict. This contract was several 
days under consiileratioti. On the 28tli instant, if my memory serves me, 
it was finally concluded. I saw the money paid by the parties; and know 
that the sum of seventy-five thousand dollars was the price to be |)aid : 
one-half in cash, and a note, at four months, for the balance. I received 
the note and money ; and was directed by Colofiel John A. Campbell, 
counsel employed by General Jesup on the part of United States, to pay 
it to the Indians whenever they assured me that they were ready to re- 
ceive it on the terms of the contract, which I was directed to ascei-tain 
were understood by them. 1 proceeded to ihe square where tlie Indians 
met to do their business, when Opothe Yoholo stated to me that Jim 
Boy had gone home to consult his people on the subject, and would return 
the next day ; and he would inform me when he retuined. I letired to 
Tallassee; and the next day oi" day after, I do not recollect delinitely 
which, he, Opothe Yoholo, sent J'nr me, and said that they were ready 
to receive the money. I proceeded to the scjuare; and stated to tlicm that 
I had c«)mc to |)ay over the money for their lands on the contract. I'iic 
Indians were in council ; and I retjuested them to say, after I had fully 
ex|)lained to them the object and consideration, that if any of them had 
any objections then to state it, and if there was none I should proceed to 
to pay it out. The chiefs and their people consulted about one hour 
longer, and then gave me their answei- : that they were ready to receive 
the money : that there weie no objections ; and every thing was fully 
understood by them. I was directed by Mr. Cam[)bell, their attorney, to 
make tiiese statements fully, that thei-e sliould be no dilUculty or 
misunderstanding on this subject, befoi-e I paid the money to them. The 
subject of the note I likewise ex|)lained ; and told them it was good, and 
would he paid. I had every reason to believe that the chiefs and Indiatis 
generally understood the contract, as they were several days in council 
on this subject. 

[ believe tlint the genei-al custom of transacting business among the In- 
dians was followed Ih this instance — as I have for six years ti-ansac:ted it 
with them; and, in this manner, through their chiefs, with the consent of 
their people. 

I conceive that Opothe Yoholo has more powci' than any chief in the 
nation among the Upper Creeks; and believe that the Govei-nmeni so 
consider him. Many of the chiefs of the Upper Creeks were present, 
and marjy of their peo[)Ie. 

The Indians sent for me while at Wetumkce, about twenty-five miles 
west of Tallassee, when the contract was made, for the ()ui'[)ose of dis- 
tributing the money. I did rM)t do so ; and stated to them 1 did not 
know how this money was to be divided. I know of no offer being made 
to Cieneral Jesuj), or to the Iinlians, of a larger sum than tlie one named 
in the contr-act. The business of the Irulians is managed by the chiefs in 
council : the consent of the individuals ai'c ascertained by llie chiefs; and 
1 understood that this coriberit was fully obtained iir the matter of this 



I 



[ Doc. INTo. 274. ] 77 

contract : and I know of no better mode of settling the land claims, in (lie 
short time allowed by Getieral Jesiip, than the one in which it was done. 

The matter of the contract was not kept a secret. As far as my knowl- 
edge extends it was known that the Indians were making a bargain with 
the Government and some persons foi* settling their disputed claims for 
some time before it was finally brought to a close. The names to the 
contract are chiefs or principal men among the Upper Creeks. 

Cross-examined. 

1st. Was the foregoing proposition made by the chiefs to the purchasers, 
or the purchasers to the chiefs r 

Answer. I do not know. 

2d. Do you know any thing of the consent of the Indians to this con- 
tract but from the report of the chiefs to you ? 

Answer. I do not. 

3d. Do you know that the Indians understood the contract but from the 
repoi-t of the ciiiefs ? 

Answer. I do not. 

4th. Were there any others except the Indians of the Tuckabardiee 
town and Jim Boy's town present at the time spoken of in the direct in- 
terrogatories ? 

Answei*. There were some others. 

5th. Did yon receive an answer to your letter of the 9th of May, 1836, 
to the Secretary of War stating 0[)othe Yoholo's proposition ? 

Answer. I believe that I received, but cannot find, the answer. 

6th. Whether, from the answer to your letter of the 9th of May, you 
were to carry into effect said propositions ? 

Answer. I was authorized or directed to carry said proposition into 
effect, but cannot say which at this time. 

Re-examined by the purchasers. 

1st. Did not the circumstances of the war, with the orders of General 
Jesup foi' the speedy removal of the Indians, thereafter render it imprac- 
ticable to carry into etfect the proposition of Opothe Yoholo ? 

Answer, it was impracticable. 

2d. Did not the Indians insist upon a settlement of their land business 
in this country j)revious to their removal West ? 

Answer. Many of them app!ie<l to me frequently, and insisted upon it. 

3d. Were not all certificates of land, by your order, to be closed on the 
25th of August, 1836: and do you know that the agents liad any authority 
to certify after that time ? 

Answer. They were ordered to be closed at that time; and I know of 
no authority aftei'wards ? 

4tii. Were you not instructed to explain, in open council to the Indians 
generally, the contract; and ascertain whether there were ajiy objections 
to it ? 

Answer. I was so instructed by Colonel Campbell, and did so. 

5tli. At the time of ])aying ovci" the mosiey in open council, did you not 
make an appeal to the common Indians interested, and state to them, that 
if there was any objection on their part to the consummation of the con- 
tract, to make it known then, as the business was then to be closed ? 

Answer. I did so to the common Indians and chiefs present, and no ob- 
jection was made. 



78 [ Doc. No. 274. J 

Gill. Wa.s it lint agreed by all the Indians present, that the money should 
be j)aid to the ( liiels ? 

Answer. I cannot say that all ihc Indians gave tiicir assent. 

rth. Was it not understood by all, and did any one dissent ? 

Answer. As far as I nndej'stood or my knowledge extends, it was under- 
stood by all (M'esent, and Tionc dissented. 

8tli. Was nut a large Jiund)er of Indians j)resent witnessing the pay. 
nient of the money, and was tiie money not paid at the s(piai'e? 

Answer. 'l'hei-c was a large nnmbt'i' of Itulians present, a!id I stepped 
aside to evade the crowd, about live steps, to a large log, and pai<i out the 
money pid»licly to llie chiefs. 

9th. Was there not a large number of jiei-sons at that time round about 
Tallassee when the contract was made and arianged r 

Answer. 'I'here was. 

10th. Was not the contract a subject of i)ublic notorie y [)revious to its 
consummation ? 

Answei'. So far as I know there was no seci-ecy about it. 

1 1 til. Do vou kn(»w of any Jinfairness or management on tiie pait of either 
party in arranging the contract i* 

Answer. 1 do not. 

12th. Did you know of ai-.y other persons at that time other than those 
there who took the contract that would have taken said contract ? 

Answer. I do not know. 

13th. What members to this contract aic embraced in the contract for 
emigrating the Indians, and name them ? 

Answer. As fai' as I know Watson, Walker, and Hanrick. 

14tli. Arc the !iames of J(d)n Peabody and Peter C. Harris named in 
the contract for emigrating the Indians? 

Answer. They are not. 

Re-examined by defendants. 

1st. Were Opothle Y(diolo and Jim Boy's people fiiendly and joined 
themselves to the whites in |)utting down the hostile Indians ? 

Answer. They manifested themselves friendly, and joined the whites 
against the hostile Indians. 

2d. Was it in the power of General Jesup, after his arri\al at I'uske- 
gce, to visit Tuckabatchee and Jim Boy's town, in safety, at any time ? 

Answer. It was in his power, with a j)roper escort. 

3d. When the Indians are assembled in council, have the common In- 
dians any voire in council ? 

Answer. Tiie business is generally done through the chiefs. 

4th. How long after you made the said explanation to the council the 
day you paid the money, did you receive the answer ? 

Answer. About one hour. 

5th. Did you receive the answer fi-om the chiefs ? 

Answer. Yes. 

6tli. Did you j)ay any money to any common Indian ? 

Answer. No, sir. 

7tli. Did you receive any answer from any common Indian ? 

Answer. No, sir. 

8th. Did you pay the money to the chiefs who signed the recei[)t on the 
contract ? 

Answer. Yes, sir. 



[ Doc. No. 274. 3 79 

Re-examined by plaintiffs' purchasers. 

1st. During the one hour you said you explained the contract and the 
time you obtained the answer, did tiie Indians retire from tiie square ? 

Answer. No. 

£d. Did you not understand tliem, during that time, consulting their peo- 
j)le to know if there was not a general assent to the conti'act and tlie pay- 
ment of the money ? 

Answer. They were all in the sfjuai-e consulting each other, and Isiip- 
j)ose tiiey were. 

5d, liow many Indians were in attendance and in the vicinity of Tal- 
lassee, attending on tlie contract ? 

Answei*. 'I'liree or four thousand were about the camp, three or four 
miles from Tallassec. 

JOHN PAGE, 
Capt. Sitpt. Creeks. 

Sworn to and subscribed before me, this 51h of December. 18S6. 

ENOCH JOHNSON, J, P. 

of Russell county, Ala. 

The foregoing examination taken by consent, and it is agreed Captain 
Page sliould send to tiie counsel a copy of the letter of the Secretary of 
War, in answer to his of the 9th of May, 1836, if he should be able to 
find it. 

SEABORN JONES, 
Att 'y for Ware, Dougherty, ^" Co. 
THOMAS G. GORDON, 
Att 'y for James S. Calhoun. 

J. C. WATSON, 

For self and others. 



NOVEMBEK 30, 1836. 

Sir : You are hereby notified that on Saturday next, between the 
hours of (10) ten a.m. and (4) four p. m.. at F(»rt Mitchell, Russell 
coimty, the testimony of Captain John Page will be taken on tlie 
jtai't of the niemojialists, in the matter of the memorial of James C. 
Watsorj and others, and counter-memorial of James S. Calhoun, and 
Ware, Dougherty, and others, |)en(ling before Thomas H. Ciawford 
and Alfied Balch, Esquires, commissioners, he, when and Mhereyoucari 
attend if you think jjroper. 

GEO. GOLDSWAITE, 
AtVy for memorialists. 

To In WIN Lawsox. 



State of Alabama, ") 
try. j 



Tallapoosa county, j 

Personally ap{)eared before me, John C Holman, a justice of the peace 
in and for the county aforesaid, George Stone, who. after being duly 
sworn, deposeth and saith that he, the said Stone, in his own proper per- 
son, did, on the 30th of November last, place in the hands and serve upon 



80 [ Doc. No. 274. ] 

Irwiti Lfwvson, in Iiis own jjroper person, an original notice, (»f wliicli the 
wiiliiii is Ji true and exiict copy. 

GEO. STONE. 
Sworn and subscribed to before nje this 1st (lav of Derember, A.D. 1836. 

JOllN C. UOLMAN, ./. P. 

It is agrc'od tliat the time of taking Captain Page's testimony be post- 
j)()iie(l until Monday next, and that it be taken between the hours of nine 
and four o'clock of that day — 3d December, 1836. 

SEABORN JONES. 
^tt -y for Ware, Dougherty, Sf Co. 
J. C. WATSON, 

For self and others. 



To Thomas II. Crawford and ./llfrcd Batch, Esqs., commissioners, ^-c. 

State OF Alabama, Macon county. 
The memoiial of Irwin Lawson, James S. Calhoun, and others, respect- 
fully sheweth that they have severally been engaged in the purchase of 
Indian locations or reservations in the territory ceded by the Creek tribe 
of Inilians to the United States, by a ti-eaty made and concluded on the 
twenty-f(»ui-th day of March, one ihousand eight hundied and thiity-two, 
and subseciuently ratified in due foi-ui by the said United States, and which 
said locations ui- reservations, your memoi-ialists are ativised, and believe, 
the said Indians had a right to sell and dispose of by saiil treaty, under 
certain regulations and restrictions j)rescribed by tlie Pi-esident of the 
United States. And your memorialists firr-ther represent, that these arrd 
certain locations, situated in what is termed McIIerri'y's district, whicli 
var-ious individirals fraudulently, wickeilly, and vNi'h intent to deceive, did 
])rocure to be certilied to therrr by the said Robert W. McIIerrr-y, who was 
iherr a cer-tifying agent, duly ai»p('intfd by the Pr-esident of the United 
Stales ; the said irrdividuals having never in anywise contracted for- or 
])ur'cht"se(l the same of the r-eal and l)ona fnle owner-s ther'eof, but ha\ irrg 
combined and corrfederated with certain other evil-disposed persorrs, to wit : 
certain Indians did cause and procure them to go befur-e the said certify, 
iug agent, and |)er'S(inate and ( lairn the name (d' the tr-uc holders of said 
tracts of land. By reason wiier-t-of, the sairl Rob't W. McHenr-y, being de- 
ceived and imposed n|)on as to the identity of said Indians, did certily the 
said contracts for the corrsideratiorr of the President of the United States, 
and as made by the true ln)lder's thereof. And your memorialists aver, 
that relying ujion the integrity and justice of the Guver-nmerrt, and believ- 
ing that countenance would not be given to such gross frauds jir'actised 
iri)on individuals, tliat the Government weir boirnd to pr-otect fr-onr imposi- 
tion by the snlemn obligations (d" a tr-caty, tiiey became pirr'chaser-s of 
many and various locations iiiade to Indians withirr said distr'ict, fr-om the 
trire holders thereof, many of which had been stolen, but which had been 
nrar ked for* reversal by the agents of the United States. Your- memorial- 
ists woirld further show Ihat they have been arlvised, arrd ver'ily believe, 
that orr *<v about the 28th day of Airgirst, A. O., 1856. an instrurrrent of 
writing, called an indenture, hut which, to your memorialists, is verily a 
iiondescr-ipt, was made between the United States of America of the first 
part, Opolhe Yoholo, Mad-Blue, Tuckabatchee Micco, Little Doc- 



[ Doc. No. 274. ] 81 

tfii', Tusteiuiggo Cliopco, styling tliemselves cliiefs of the Creek tribe 
of Indians, of the second ])art ; ant! James C Watson, Edvvai'd Hanrick, 
William Walker- & Co., Peter C, Hai-ris. and Joiin Peabody, of'tlie thii-d 
part. By wliicli said instrtuncnt of writing, it would seem to appear, that 
tlie said Indians did agree and did suppose to remise, release, and forever 
quit claim, &c., to the said Watson and others, of all the lands lying in 
McIIetjry's district, and iticluded in the number alleged to have been fraudu- 
lently certified, and which had formed the subject of contest before the 
agents of tlie United States ; and also a privilege, amounting to the right 
of pre-em[)tion, to take all the unsold lands, and those belonging to 
Indians w!io had died subsequent to tiieii* locations, and who had n(»t sold, 
for the sum of seventy-five thousand dollars — one half to he [»aid in cash 
at the time the said instrument of wiiting was made, and the otlier half 
to be paid in four months at Fort Gibson, in the State of Arkansas : all 
which said proceedings were sanctioned by the said Major General Jesup, 
on the same day. Your memorialists are free to confess that they are at a 
loss to understand the meaning of this novel and singular instrument. But 
they are still more at a loss to determine iiow the United States have been 
brought to be ma<ie a party to this instrument. But believing that said in- 
strument was made in violation of tiie vested rights of individuals, and 
that the same is contrary to tlie treaty, and consequently illegal and void, 
your memorialists crave your attetitioii. 

Ist. Accoiding to the treaty of tiie 24th March, 1832, the Creek tribe 
rede to the United States ail their lands east of the Mississippi river; 
and the United States, among other things, allow to ninety principal 
chiefs one section of land each, and to eacli head of a Creek family 
one half section each ; wliich said tracts of land are reserved fronj sale 
foi* their use, for the term of five yeais, unless sooner disposed of by 
tliem. It is further provided by said treaty '' that these tracts may 
be conveyed by the persons selecting tiie same to any other persons, 
for a fair consideration, in such manner as the President may direct." 
Prior to said treaty, your memorialists admit that all the lands in the 
Ci'eek tei'ritory weie !)eld in comnion; but they insist tliat, upon the execu- 
tion of this treaty, the United States became possessed of the authority to 
control the lands ceded by the treaty ; and the tenure by which they were 
held was so changed, that the sections and half sections allowed to the 
chiefs and heatis of families were held by them, under a right somewhat, 
and for the time, imperfect; but which would ripen, after the expiration of 
five yeais, into a perfect title in fee-simple in them and their heirs, unless 
sooner disposed of by them, under regulations prescribed by the President 
of the United States ; in which case, the right which they would liave had 
to a jjatent from the United States, after the expii-ation of five years, had 
they remained on the land, passed to the purchaser; and the United Slates 
bound themselves to perfect a title to the purchaser, on the comj)leti(ni of 
the payment. Under this view, which your memorialists believe to be 
coirect in fact, in law, and in equity, they cannot but be convinced, and 
trust that it will be consider-ed a fair ititerence, tliat the Indians had such 
an estate under this treaty as could ju)t |)ossihiy bo divested but bv their 
0\y.ti proper act and deed; and then only, as has already been sai(i, agripeaT 
hly to tlie regulations prescribed by tlie President of the United States. 
Your menioiialists ai*e then brought to this natural, and, they believe just 
conclusion, that, although the chiefs of the tribe may, previous to the treaty, 
6 



.82 [ Doc. No. 274. ] 

as the rcj>iPsenlati\c.s of llic pooplc of the tribi', have had jiower tn <Ii.s- 
jjcse (>r these lands ; \et, ii|)(>ii tlie latiCication ul" ihe treaty, lliey were 
ceded uiir«)iidili<»iially to liie Ciiitcd States ; aiid tlu'V. eoiistqueiitly, as 
chiel's, emild haM' ixt lai-ther < oiitrnl over l!i«in, and muid not sell litem to 
afiy iiidixidiial \\ liale\ re. Haviirg, as be/ore stated, paited witii ail the 
light N\hirh tluy. as a nation, liild n\ci- the lands, thry accejiti'd. as cliiels 
and heads of laniilies, seclioris and liaUsrclinns. which it was in tiieir power 
To convey as indivjilnals, and as individnals only* ior a t'airconsidri-ati<»n. 
>Veie this all the aiguinenl whieii emild hi- adduced against the validity ami 
legal I'oice t)l' this contract. > our memorialists hclieve that it would he sulfi- 
cient to stt it aside as nothing worth in law. But tliey ad\ anee anotlier ar- 
gument against this sale hy the nation, \>hich is noihing less than the 
rxpress written law, jMohiltiting the sale and purchase ol lands IVom 
Indian tribes, by any jierson or persons whomsoever, declaring all such 
pur( liases null and void. 

ir, then, it be contended that this contract was made by the chiefs, as 
the r«'prcsentatives of the nation, we plead the art td' Congress above re- 
ferred to in bar of its sanction, and say that the United States could alone 
have m;ule tiie purchase. If as the agents and repiesttilativts of the in- 
dividual leservi'es, we answer, that the individual reservees had no power 
to delegate to others ilie right to dispose of their reservations, even if they 
had been so disposed. 'I'he right of individual rebervees haxing been 
granted to them by the treaty, the chiefs could imt take that which be- 
longed to otiiers, and conve> it away, either as chiefs, (lor the treaty for- 
bids it,) or as private individuals, (for the statutes of the land forbid it.) 
Your memorialists j)resume that tlie grantees under this indenture, will 
not pretemi that their claim shmdd be considered as a treaty made 
with the nation, for that would be (ontrary to all law and the true policy 
of the United States. It must, therefore, be h»oked upon as a contract ; 
and, if a cimtract, it must be construed and governed by the settled atnl 
established law.s of the land govirning contracts. Before (juitting this 
part of the subject. }our memorialists would say that, according t<i law, 
no contract for the sale of lands has, or can have, any binding force or 
efticacy, unless made by the j)ai-{y entitled to convey the same, in writing, 
or by some ])erson thereunto by him lawfully auilnnized. Aow it will 
not be contemled that any written authority was ever given these chiefs to 
sell the reservations belonging t(j others, and w hich are attempted to be 
conveyed away in this instrument; and this bargain and sale, (if it be 
such,) being deficient in this important particular, is void and of no force. 
Mr. Canii)bell, who w as apitointed by jSlajor General Jesiip to draugfit the 
contract for the signature ot the jiarties, was satisfied that the consent of 
the individual reservees was necessary, before they could be bound by the 
contract ; and, in support of this, }our memorialists would call your atten- 
tion to this important allegation in the contract; but which is unsu|)ported 
by the slightest shadow of proof, namely : that they '• have obtained the 
consent of their jyeople to remise, release, and forever <juit claim to all their 
right to these lands." Upon such an im|)ortant matter, is it not at least a 
presumption against the contract, tliat no attempt has been made to prove 
or support this allegation iiy legal testimony ? Your memorialists assert 
that it cannot be proved that such consent, either verbal or written, ever 
was given ; and they hold that, under every princi|)le of e\idence, the 
jmi thubers under the contract are bound to prove this vital asseveration. 



[ Doc. No. 274. ] 83 

If tlipy fail to prove if, their contract must fall to the ground. But, to 
convince tlie comini.ssioners, so far as most of the towns iiu!u(ie(l in 
the contract are concerned, that this consent never was given, }t»ur me- 
ujor-ialists would i-efei- to the entry signed hy General Jesiij) on the conti-act 
itself, that 'I'ustenugge Chi>j)co, the chief of the Tallassee town, as- 
fserted, at the titne tlial he signed fhe contract, that lie had not ohttiiiied tiie 
consent of his people. They offer further to prove, should the commis- 
sioners re(piire it, that Jim Boy, who also sigm^d the contract, and \\\ui is 
the chief of the i'liiobtiilocco town, has assei-ted that, although he signed 
tliecoiitract, it was not ex[)!ained io him; and that iie did it without the 
C(nisent of his peoj)lc. The other towns included in the contract, except 
Tuckahatchee, wei'e iiot represented hy their chiefs. But admitting, for 
the sake of ai-gumeiit, that this consent was obtained to remise, re- 
lease, &c. : youi" memorialists take the position, that they have not so re- 
mised, i-eleased, &c. ; that this insti-nment of writing < annot he; consti'ued 
intt) an indenture or deed, but must be cotisidert^d a jnere contract to do 
that w hich they allege they have obtained the consent to pej-form ; and that, 
under this paper, really nvthing is; (Conveyed. In the assei-tion, that the 
consent of tbe peojde of the towns in Mclit-nry's district was obtained by 
the chiefs who signed (lie contract, it surely was the indiicement by which 
the chiefs shniild ha^e been actirated : and sucji inducement l»eing a ma- 
teria! fact, ouglit to he fully proved ; and how can it be ()ri>ved to tlie sat- 
isfaction of a legal tribunal, but by some instrument or memoramlum in 
writing, signed by the individuals giving such consent ? Suppose that a 
reservee under the treaty shcnild not emigrate to Arkansas, (and there 
are some who have not, and who jn-obably will not,) but should remain on 
the land til! the expiration of five years, and an action of ejectment or 
ti'esj)ass to try titles wei-e commenced against him by the purchasers un- 
der tiiis contract : would not a couit of law Indd tlie puichasej-s to a proof 
of his consent, made in wi'iting, and sigm-d by him, before they couid sus- 
tain their action ? Surely they would. J3ut the consent alleged to have 
been obtained by the chiefs seems to be nothing more than that the people 
had consented to remise, release, he. tlieirown lands. And, from the phra- 
seology of tiie coTitiMct, it cannot be implied, and it is not expi'essed, tiiat 
they gave consent to the chiefs to i-emise, lelease, &c. This apjiears to 
your memoi'ialists to he the fairest intei-pretation, and they submit it for 
your consideration. But again : while upon the subject of consent, your 
menuM-ialists would take leave fui'ther to remark, that, so far from the fact 
of the people consenting, they are ready and willing to j)rove to the com- 
missioners that, upon the assemliling of the Tuckal)atchee town, tiie In- 
dians expressly declared that they had not sold their lands, and would i-e- 
ceivein> part of the money. 

2d. But should the commissioners come to the conclusion that thecliiefs, 
as the representatives of their towns, have therightto alieirate and dispose 
of the lands of others in which thry themselves have no interest — for it 
must be i-ecol!ected tiiat these chiefs had, pi-evious to the date of this con- 
tract, disposed of their own reservations in the mode piescribed by the 
President of the United States — your memoi-ialists insist that they can 
only alienate and convey the lands belr)tiging to such towns as were rejJiTseut- 
ed by their chiefs, and whose chiefs signed this contract. They trust they 
have shown, conclusively, that upon this principle, neither the Tallassee 
towQ nor the Thlobthlocco town, although their chiefs signed the con- 



84 [ Doc. No. 274. | 

tract, ought to lie boniid by it. The instrument itself shows that no 
chiefs signe(-l the contract fi-oni fourteen towns which are included witliin 
its operations ; so that, of the seventeeti towns embraced in the contract. 
theiT is but one, to wit, Tuckabatchee, whicii can l)e aflfected by it, even 
should you come to this conclusion. 

3d. IJut your memorialists would call your attention to another ])art of 
the contract. According to the third article or provision of the conti-act, 
it is in express terms said, "that the money hereafter stipulated to be paid, 
shall be paid to the Indian eutilled to the land, in the presence of the ciiief 
and an olUrei- of the United States; and until such i)ayment be made, it 
shall be deposited with the certifijins; agent of this district : the pavment of 
which shall be a consummation of the c(uitract." Has this stipulation in 
the contract been complied with, eithei* in whole or in |>3rt, by the parties 
claiming under it ? Has the numey, in any single instance, been |)aid to 
the Indian entitled to the laud, eiliu-r in the j)resence of an ollicer ol the 
United States, or out of it ? Has the money been deposited with the cer- 
tifying agent of this district ? The |)ayment of tlie UKUiey to the Indian 
entitled to the land, in the presence of the chief and an oIBccr of tlie Uni- 
ted States, or a dcpositeof the money with the ceitilying agent of this dis- 
trict, being a condition precedent, the contract could not have been con- 
sunmiated until one or the othei- had been done. That neithei- has been 
performed, must be apparent to the commissioners ; that tliis condition pi-e- 
cedent has not been complied with on the part of NN atsoti and wther>-, y<m 
have ocular proof on the back of the conti-act itself; it being there shown 
that the sum sti[)ulate(l to be paiil. to wit, S;'7,500, was paid to Opolhe 
Yoholo, Mad Blue, Tuckabatchee Micco, Tusteniigge Chopf-o, and 
Tusconee Uadjo, the lattei- of whom is a chief of the Fish-poiul town, 
not included within McHenry's district, who never signed the con- 
ti-act, and whose peoj)le were not interested therein. Your memorirdists 
assert, without fear of contradiction, that the Indians, whose lands were 
thus attempted to be ccjnveyed away, and who were the Indians entitled to 
the lands, and cotisefjuently to receive the money accor-ding to the stipula- 
tions of the contract itself, never have received one (hdlar arising fiom said 
sale. The Indians have thus been robbed of their lands; and when a far- 
cical sale is pretended ly made, and for a trilling sum in comparison with 
the real value, the real owner, even then, does not receive the miserable 
moiety to which he is entitled under the contract. 

4th. The fourth article or (irovision of the contract, it seems to your 
memorialists, is utteily contradictory of the preandile to the same instru- 
ment. The clause to which they refer is in these words : *'thatif any 
Indian, holding ajiy parcel of land herein conveyed, shall refuse to carry 
into elTect the provisions of this contract, then, and in that case, a pro rata 
allowance upon the consideration hereinafter stipulated shall be made to 
the parties of the thii-d part, j)rrtri<i<'(/ that this consent shall be given be- 
fore the consummation of the contract." As there is nothing to be as>cnt- 
ed to by the Indian, rtnd as the sentence is ])eifectly unintelligible as it 
r«)W stands, they jjresimie that the last clause of the sentence should have 
read, " provide<l this dissent shall be given," &c. : considering it thus, 
your memorialists would say that they have never seen a more glaring in- 
stance of di^ingenuousness. If the consent of the Indian be necessar-y to 
the validity of this ( untract — us your memorialists conti'iid tiiat it is. both 
under the law and by the admissions of the contract itself — how, they would 



[ Doc. No. 274. ] 85 

ask, would it have been possible for six hundred and thirty Indians, whose 
locations and whose habitations were scattered over an extent of country 
cfjual, at least, to three thousand six hundred square miles, many of them 
5)1(1 and infirm, wlio might have dissented, enter such dissent when the con- 
tract was made and executed, and the money paid to the chiefs at one and 
the same time, in a retired j)]ace, and at an howr after midniglit : Your me- 
morialists confess that to them it requires more than human charity to give 
such proceedings a favorable contemj)lation. But they may be told that 
the time for the Indian to dissent was when the money was offered to him 
in the presence of the chief and ati officer of the United States : to this 
they answer, that such an offer has not been made ; if it has, they call upon 
those claiming undei* the contract to produce legal evidence of tiie fact. 

5th. Your memorialists would now call your attention to ti)e considera- 
tion exjjressed in the contract. They aver that the consideration given for 
these lands was wholly inadequate to the true value thereof. From the 
reports of the investigating agents, tiiere are at least six hundred and thirty 
half sections tliat are the subject of dispute, and these contain over two hun- 
dred thousand acres of land. Now, it is a legitimate inference that these lands 
would never have been stolen from the Indians if they had not been good 
and valuable ; and by aiithmetical calculation you will (i]u\ that, by the con- 
sideration expressed in the contract, but a fraction over thirty-seven cents 
an acre was to be paid for said lands. INow your memorialists aver that 
many of the tracts included in the contract would readily command over 
one thousand dollars, atnl none are of less value thajj sixty-two and a half 
cents per acre. But the commissioners are not left to vague opinion as to 
the value of the lands. Your memorialists offei- to prove that §150,000 
was offered for the same lands on the same day that this contract was 
made, and befoie it was executed. Had General Jesup and his agent. 
Colonel Campbell, acted their parts as became the vice-guardians of this 
much-wronged people, they sui-ely would not have taken S75,000 for that 
for which they could as easily have obtained ^'^150,000. Nay, your 
memorialists feel assured, had Major Abbott, who was the certifying 
agent foi* this district, been allowed by General Jesuj) to have certified to 
conti-acts under the regulations then adopted by the President, and a copy 
of which bad been transmitted to Geneial Jesup, that sales would have 
been made by the individuals who were entitled to the land, and who only, 
in their own proper persons, had a right to sell ; and tjiat an aggregate 
sum, equal to the amount of three lumdied thousand dollars, would have 
been received by the rightful ownei's, whom these contractois are now 
seeking to defraud out of their just rights. One of the regulations adopt- 
ed by the Pi*esident was, that the certifying agent should cei-tify "that 
the Indian who sold had received the full value of the land." Can this 
boaj'd of commissioners, with the facts made ])!ain to their view, certify to 
tire Fresident that they believe that these Indians have i-eceived the full 
value of their lands, or that they, the individual reservees, who wei-e en- 
titled to the land, ever* received one dollar therehir ? Your memorialists 
further state that Mr. Campbell, v. ho was appointed by General Jesup, at 
the request of the chiefs, to see that justice was done them, has»not and 
will not certify that he believes that the full value was given. 

The last argument to which your* memorialists would call your atten- 
tion is one founded on the instructions of thePr-esident, tr-ansmitted through 
the Secretary of War-, to Major General Jesup; and if they can show, as 
they do not doubt they can, that General Jesup has transcended the plain 



86 



[ Doc. No. 274. J 



IcUor <<riiis instruolioiis, oi- that lie has totally disrM'g.irdcd tlicm. and that, 
too, witliin till* know ledge ot flic partiis claiiiiiiig under lliis cuiitiact, tliev 
do not think that they hit asking loo innch to ask >ou to derUle against ils 
validil>. Tin* inslt uctions. then, to (jein ral Je>n|» aie in theM' words, 
and are I'linnded on a |iro|iosition inaiU- hy Opothe Yuhulo lo Captain 
Tag**, and hy that nflntr communicated lo ihe Secretary of ^Var, lor tiic 
inlonnatioti of the Presiilent, and lor his decision thereon. Opolhe 
Yolndo says : " I have conic on one pla-i \\hi( h 1 wish t<» adopt, and be ofT 
inuiieiiiauly ; which is this : a company id" i^entlenien have seen nearly all 
the companies who purchased our lands, and lliey have agreed to raise a 
sum ol" money ecpiivalent to ihe value of the lands wc claim to have heen 
defrauded of. 'J'hey |irii|)ose to pay us in this way, for instance: 1 will 
call all the persons in niy town together whose lands have heen taken by 
l>ersonating, or other frauds practised on them ; and the purchaser or 
iiis agent heing present, in the presence of the two principal chiefs of each 
town, and air agent of the United States, shall pay to the rightful holder 
of the land a sum «(f money to his and the chiefs' full satisfaction: and in 
case the parlies cannot agree, two disinter ested and res|)ectable white men 
shall (one hy the chiefs and one hy the |)urihaser) he selected to \alue the 
Jand. and the amount of their valuation under oath shall he paid. The 
receipt id' the money, and the acknowledgment of satisfaction by the Indian, 
shall he cerliHed to hy an ageirt of the United States and the chiefs of the 
town, and the title to he perfected in the name rd' the purchaser written on 
the face «d" the first deed, [)assed in and (crtiiied lo hy any of the ceriilving 
agents, whether the President may have leveiseti and made void the deeds 
approved or not ajiproved. and consequently the lands and titles belong to 
the original jnirchaser. before either of the {ertifying agents." The fact 
of this |)iri[)osilion having been approval and ado|)ted by the President, is 
evident from the letter cd' the Seeietary <»f Wav to Major General Jesuj), 
dated May 19th, 183G. of which the lollowing is an extract : "I enclose 
the copy of a letter IVom Captnin I'age, by which you will per<eive the 
views (d'lliat ofiicer rm the subject, and the projiosition made hy the L|i|)er 
Creeks. This proj)osilion has been ajiproved, and Ca|)lain l'"ge advised 
of the fact. So far, therefore, as any part of tliis division c»f the Creeks 
shall remain peaceable, you are authorized to sanction the proceedings 
recommended." And further: "If the arrangement stated by Captain 
Page should take elTect, vou are aulhoii/.ed to select a comp^'tent oHicer, 
should the Indians desire it, to see that justice is done; and also to a)»poiiit 
a certilyiiig agent, should any he entered into as above mentioned : his 
duties and compensation w ill be go\erned hy the prescribed regulations." 
These regulations having heen adopted and apjiroved by the ['resident, 
(ieneral Jesiiji was hound to act agreeably to them, or not to act at all. 
He had no power over the matter, other than that delegated to liim by the 
President. lie had no power to sanchon any other contiact than one 
foundeil upon ami follouing the prnpusiliiui made hy (Jjiothe Yolndo, 
and which f<>rmi-d the havis of his instructions : and just so far, and no 
farther, as he followed Ihe rcgulalions prescribed hy the President, could 
Iris sanction give any validriy to a contract. He, alihougli a major 
general, had no more right to «lisohey the instructions of the Piesideiit, 
as OMiimunicated to him by Ihe Secretary of War, or to mark out a plan 
for the dis|)osili()n of these lands diirerent from that which the I'lesident 
had ajipr(j\ed, than had accitifj>ing agent. Suppose, then, il being re- 



[Doc. No. 274.] 87 

c{airc(l by oncoF the regulations adopted by tbc President, that a certifyinj^ 
aajent sliali ''certilV that said IiKlian canie before him," &c. : that the. 



agent, instead thereof, should state in iiis certifirate that said Indian did 
not coMie before me, as rerjuiied by the regulations, but that I iieard that 
lie had consented to sell his land to A H for wiiatt-ver C D chose to take 
for it : surely no one would cuntend t!iat tiiis! would be such a comiiliancc 
with the instructions as would {»ass a (itle to the juircbaser and authoi'ize 
the ai)i)rovai of the President. 

If. then, the certificate of tbe certifying agent in tiie case above stated 
would not give validity to a deed, so neither will General Jesup's sanc- 
tion to a ilwi\ made by six chiefs out of twenty- four enrolled in the seven- 
teen towns included in tbe contract, give validity to it ; and particularly 
when the contract was consummated without notice to tbe purchasers 
who were intended to be benefited by the instructions, was not publicly 
made, but in a private room, and after tbe hour of midnight. The c«)ntract 
not benefiting, as it was the intention of the President it should do, the 
gi'eat mass of pui-chasers vvlio bad coittested claims, and who were willing 
to buy i)eace, but only benefiting a few itulividuals, and that at the ex- 
])eiise, as they have already shown, to the individual res^M-vees, even admit- 
ting that tiiey had received what was j)aid to the diiefs, of sevettty-five 
thousand doiiurs ; this contract, so made in vi(dation, as your memo- 
rialists have attemjited, and tliey hope successfully, to prove, of all law. 
and the plain regulations of the President of tlie United States, is now 
attempted to be set up; and tbe effect of it would be to depi-ive your 
ineuiorialists of rights guarantied to them by the treaty, and to rob six 
hundi-ed and thirty individuals of the poor pittance which the Government 
has given as a miserable compensation for the large country of which they 
and their fathers vvei-e possessed. 

Your memorialists pray, therefore, that you would order and decree 
that said six individuals, pretending to be chiefs of the Creek nation, had 
no right to sell and dispose of lands guarantied to individuals' reserves, 
either with or without their consent ; aiid that Major General Jesup, in 
sanctioning said contract above referred to, transcended the authoriry 
given him by the President of the United States. And furtiier. inasmuch 
as sai<l insti-uctions, oi* a copy of tliem. were jnj!)lished in the public 
gazettes i'ov the information of all concerned, and as said claisnants must 
liave seen theiu. and consequently could not have been deceived as to the 
j)Owers of the said Major General Jesup, tliey pray tUat their pretended 
contract may be set asi(le, and ren!lere<l null and void, and of no force or 
effect. And your memorialists, as in duty bouiid. will ever pray, &c. 

HENRY THOMPSON, 
JOHN H. PETERS, 
JOSEPH BRYAN, 

JiWys for memoridlisfs. 

On t'.ie 28(h August, 1836, a contract was entered into between the Uni- 
ted States of the first part, certain cliiefs of the Creek tribe of Indians of 
the second jjart. and James C. W;itson and otiiers of the third part. To 
sustain t!ie contract, a memorial has been submitted to the commissioners 
by tiie parties of the tiiird part : and in supj)ort of tlie memoi-ial atid tlie 
contract, they now submit, for the consideration of the commissioners, the 
following argument : 



88 



[ Doc. No. 274. I 



The first article of the contract uliicli it is piuiposcd fo consider, is a 
tiansler and conM'Vanco of all the tracts ol" land ceded by tlic treaty of 
1831', within certain limits, which have lonned the suhject of contest be- 
fore the agents of the United titates. The other articles of the contract 
provide for the security of pi i.ir bona fide |)nrcha>.ers from tlie liglitfnl 
claimants ; secure to individual reservees the right of dissenting before 
the execution of the contract ; extend to other lands of the same class, in 
a diiri-reiit situation; ami provide for the payment of all. These articles 
it is unnecessary, for tli(> jiresent, tr) examine ; involving, as they do, the 
same (jut stions of validity and legality which are presented in tlie consid- 
eration of tiie first article. 

1 lie contract, upon its lace, ajipiars to have been made with reference to 
the treaty of 1832; ami the first <|uestion which aiises is, whether its pro- 
visions arc in agi cement or contra\ention of that instrument. 

The first article of the treaty is an unconditional sui render, by the 
Creek tribe of IiMJians. of all tlu-ii- lands cast of the Mississippi river. 
The second article provides, after the survey of the laml, fur liie allow- 
aiK e to each head of a family to select onehalf section of each, which 
tracts ''shall be rescr\cd from sale, for their usl\ for the term of five years, 
unless soonei- disposed of by them." The third article, that these tracts 
may be conveyed, •' by the persons selecting the same, to any other person, 
for a fair consideration, in such manner as the Presidoit may direct." 
'Ilic contract shall be certified by some person ap|)oin'ed by the President 
for that jturpose, but shall not be valid till "the Ti esident apjiroves the 
SHine." A title shall be given by the United States on the completion of 
the j)aymeiits. The fourth article provides, that at the end of five years, 
all the Creeks entitled to these sclecti(ms, and desirous of remaining, shall 
receive patents therefor, in fee-simiile, from the United States. 

ThesL- are the only articles of the treaty which, it is apprehended, have 
any bearing on the stdiject undei- consideration. 

'Jhe ihiid article of the treaty expressly gives to the Indian the rigiit to 
con\ey his reserve foi- a fair ccinsideration, in such manner as the Presi- 
dent may direct; and in the examination (»f this contract, with reference 
to this clause of the treaty, the i|uestions arise : 

1st. Can the rcservce delegate the conveying power to another ; an:I, 

2d. Uhether a parol delegation of this power is sufficient. 

In relation to tlie first jioint. it is dilHcuIt to conceive of any reason \\liy 
the resi-rvee should foini an exception to the general and estal)lishe(l rule 
of law. The same reasons exist for the ajiplication of the rule to the In- 
dian as to the wliiti- maji ; and as some cases must necessarily arise, in 
which the exercise of tf:c ctrnvcying power might be dilficult or impossi- 
ble for the rcsevce to execute othervxisc than by agent, is il to besup|)osed 
tliat in tliose cases the party should be depriveil of the benefit intended to 
be extended him by the treaty ? IJy that instrumi-nt liie conveyance is to 
be made "in such manner as the I'resident may direct ;*" and, unless thn 
term conreytinct is to be taken in its most refined and technical sense, a 
])arol or \erbal cwnveyance, if adopted by the directing power, is as con- 
clusi\e and binding as the most soleinn instrument. 'I'lie rights of the 
indi\idual reservees could be as well protected by the adoption of th'j one 
mode as the other; and to recjnire, in all cases, a cojiveyance in writing, 
would olien expose him to the frauds and machinations of su|)erior ednca- 
iutn. The relation which exists between the United States and the Indian, 



I 



[ Doc. No. 274. ] 89 

approaches to that of guardian and ward; and the treaty, keeping in view 
tills relation, .secures the protection of the President, hy submitting to his 
discretion the njode and manner of llie conveyance, to adopt that which 
may he tlie best calculated to stcnre tlie interest of tlie paity and realize the 
objects of the treaty. If there is any doubt as to the construction of the 
term •' convey," it is resolved by a refei'ence to the |)recediiig article of 
tJie treaty, in which the word "dispose" is used instead of ••convey." 
The teiins, we think, are synonymous. 

Tiie mode and manner of tlie conveyance, wiiether in person oi' by 
agent, verbally or in writing, being entirely at the discretion of the Pres- 
ident, and dependent solely u{)on his appi'oval, we jiroceed to inquire 
wliethei', under the treaty, the delegation of tiie conveying power is re- 
quired to be in writing. The only reason that can render it necessai-y is, 
that by the reduction of the will to writing, the evidence of the act is 
thereby rendered mor-e cleai- and explicit. In the ordinary transactions of 
civilized life, the law dr)es not require it ; although ther-e, the pr-opriety of 
the rule is not to be questioned. The tr-eaty does not, in expr*ess terms, 
require it; and doubts nright well arise:_as to the correctness of the rule 
when applied to the habits and manner of life of tiic Indian. If the evi- 
dence of delegation or authoi-ity on the par-t of those exercising, is sulH- 
cient, no satisfactory r'eason occur-s to us why the exercise of this will, by 
])aj'oI, should not be considered valid and oper-ative. We r-epeat again, tiiat 
it is left entirely to the discretion of the President to fulfil the equities of 
the treaty, in the manner best calculated to insure the most beneficial 
results to the Indian. 

We are aware that a distinctioir may be taken between natioiial and in- 
dividual pr-operty, and that the United States have, in their intcrcoui'se 
with the Indiair tr-ihes, r-ecognised ilie right of disj)osition by the chiefs so 
far only as the national |)roj)ii'ty is concerned. The soundness of the dis- 
tinction is not perceived. The recognition of the right of the chiefs to 
treat for or surrender- national proper-ty, is based either on the particular 
princij)les of their Government, or on their repi'esentative character', as 
exercising a special authority delegated to them by the membeirs of their 
tribe. If the fii-st i-ule is aclopted, the histor-y of the nation infornrs us of 
the despotic and absolute power- of the chiefs over the pi-operty as well as 
the ])crsons of their tribe ; a power which has been exercised by the chiels 
and acknowledged by the nation, from the earliest period of their history. 
The contract, however*, places it oir their representative character, and 
exj)ressly states that they had ascer-tained the sense of their towns, and 
secur-es the right of dissent to any individual r-eservee befor'e the consum- 
mati(ni of the conti-act. Tin^ United States have themselves recognised 
this exercise of authotity in the chiefs, irr their instj'uctions to Messr's. 
Benson, Martin, and Fitzj)atj-ick, in relation to the i-eserves, part of which 
are the subject of the present contr-act. Having established, as we think, 
that the pr'(»vi.sions of the conti"act ar-e in accor-dance with tire ti-eaty of 
1832, we will next inquii-e in what manner it is aftected by the laws of this 
State. 

By the fir-st article of the treaty, the nation make to the United States 
an uuconditiorral surr'endei- of all their" lands east of the Mississippi river*. 
Antecedent to this cession, they ])ossessed no title to the lands, which could 
be recognised either* by the laws of this State or the United States. They 
wer'e simply the occirpants of the soil, the ultimate fee of which resided in 
the United States, charged with the special right of occupancy until ex- 



90 [ Doc. No. 274. ] 

tinc;iii>!ir(l \\\ voluntary rcssiort. Tiy tlic first article of the tr'oaty tliis 
riglit is i'Xtitis;iiis|ii*«l, and tlic al)soliili'. utujualilied, anil uncniMliti'iMal tfj- 
tliijs vesfril ill ilic L'liifcii States, Have tin' (iciicral (ioveriiiDciit divt-st- 
ed tliemsclvcs (if the title tliiis a('i|iiii-rd. as to any porfitMi of tin* ccdi'il ter- 
ritory r By tlie second article itf the treaty, ea<li head of a family is efiti- 
tled to ** select one halt" section of land, to he reserved from sale, lor tiie 
use <d' the person niakiii!:; the selection, loc the term cd" five years." in the 
niaiitiei' dii ecled hy, and stihject to the appi-oval of, the I'resident, lias 
the re>^e|•vee any title under this ai'ticle which the law can rero^ni^ie ns tille/ 
If he has, any further act of the Government would seem to he superHu- 
ous. Hut these tracts are to be reserved from sale ; titles are to be made 
either to the Indian or the purchaser, only upon certain conditions ; an<l 
until these conditions aie fultilled, the reservee is entitled to the use of the 
reserve <Mily. coupled with the ccmditional right of disposition. The re- 
serves fo! ni a pirtion of the public domain. The (rovernment, ciiai'^ed 
with the trust above specified in favor (d" the Indian, are the Ici^al owners; 
and these lands can only be disposed of in the manner pointed out by the 
treaty, atid prescribed by the laws <d" the United States. Snp[tose a re- 
servee to dispose of his interest to an individual, without tiie ratification of 
the Pifsident : what title or interest would thereby be conveyed ? The 
answer is ob\ioiis. By the treaty, the title dejx'nds upon the appr«)val of 
the I'lesident. and the issuance of the [)atenf : ami until these ac'.s are per- 
formed, the undivided title is in the United States. The rit^ht to demand 
the title of the (fuvernment, on the expiration of live years, to himself, (U' 
to an approved jiui-chaser from !iim, before the termination of that pei-iod, 
is in the reservee. 

These views were maintained bv the Govertiment, in their well-known 
controversy with Governor Gayle, in 1853. They receive additional 
strength fVom the opinion of the Att<»rney General, in his communication 

to the War Department, bearing date , 1836, in which the fd- 

lowing language is applied to a ()Ui"stio!i of title un«ler the treaty: '• The 
third article thus takes a disiinc.tion between the I'residenl's apjirobation 
of the conti'act, and the perfection of the title. It evidently contemplates 
the necessity of a further act. It is obvious that, as no title had been sjiven 
in the Indian mnlcing the selection, some further act is necessary to vest in 
the purchaser the title of the United States. In the cases provided lor in 
the fourth and sixth articles, it is ex|)ressly declared that patents shall is. 
sue to the Indian lor the selected li'acts. There is no dilference between 
these cases and those provided for, except that, under the second anil third 
articles, the title is to be given, not to tlie Indian, but to the purchaser 
from him. The means of title must be the same in both cases ; that is to 
say, a patent from the United States." 

The same ductrine was <-onsidered as settled by the decision of our owti 
supreme court, in which it was decided that the incident <d' dos\er did 
not attach to an Indian reserve. In this case, tlie quantity of interest 
possessed hy the reservee is cmisidered, and the adjudiralion made on the 
ground that the Indian had no title. 

It has been intimated that the statute of frauds of Alabama may have 
son:e hearing or connexion with the subject. WijiU due deference, we 
think that the reasons belore stated would apply to the exclusion of the 
contract from the ojieration of the statute. If, lio\wver, the reservee in 
reality possesses a disposable interest, the statii'e of frauds of this State 



[Doc. No. 274. ] 91 

requires only tliat tlie contract should be in writing, "signed by the party 
to becbarged, or some person by bim lawfully aiitliorized." 'J'be authority 
to sign tlie contract is not required to be in rcriting^ but may be by pa- 
rol. (See Roberts on Frauds, 113; Sug. Ven., Coles vs. I'recotbick, 9 
Vesey, 251.) Again: tbe contract has been executed, by tbe jtaynient of 
a portion of ibe consideration — a circtnnstance whicli, altbougb, according 
to tbe (ale autiiorities, not sufficient to take tbe case out of the statute, is 
entitled to much weight in tbe equitable consideration of tbe conti-act. 

One question o\\\y renjains to be disposed of : Is the consideration, stip- 
ulated to be paid by tbe contract, a fair consideration within the terms 
and meaning of the treaty ? 

It is inij)ossible to lay down any definite rule to determine upon the ade- 
quacy of consideration. In every contract, it must necessarily depend 
upon the different ideas of the contractoi-s in relation to the object of their 
contract. What may be a full and fair consideration to one, is to another 
totally inadequate. Tiie current of authorities, both English and Ameri- 
can, does, we think, establish W\tt position that mere inadequacy of price 
affords no ground, eithei- at law or equity, for vacating a contract in 
other respects perfect. (2 Roberts on Frauds, 151; 2 Bay, 380; Hand, i. 
27B: 6 Hand, i. 276, 282.) 

By the treaty, however, a fair consideration is necessary to the validity 
of all contracts for the sale of reserves. 

Two classes of lands are embraced by the present contract : Ist. The 
tracts included withiri certain towns, »*which have either been certified and 
marked for reversal, or which have been sold and certified without au- 
thority in tbe agents of the United States ;" and, 2<lly, I'hose tracts 
in the same towns which have not been sold by the reseivees. As these 
last tracts are to be taken at the valuation of the agents of the United 
States, our in(juiries as to the adeipiacy of consideration need only to 
extend to that class of lands embraced by the first article of the contract. 
For these lands, the sum of seventy-five thousand d(dlars has been paid ; 
and the individual reseivcc is entitled to one-half of any amount hereafter 
to be j)aid upon any contract for any selection, which shall be preferred 
by the agents of the United States : provided, it exceeds the pro rata val- 
uation under the contract, assuming, as a l>asis of calculation, that there 
are six Inindied and fifty tracts conve3ed by the fii-st article (if ti>e con- 
tract — which is believed to be a fair estimate — a fraction above thirty-six 
cents an acre has been paid for these lands ; fop tracts of w hich, all are 
dis|)uted, and many covered by more tlian one adverse claim. The time 
at which the conti-act was entered into is, by no means, aw immatei-ial cir- 
cumstajice ; foi' it is scarcely within the pale of probability, that the most 
valuable ti-acts should remain the longest unsold. More than four years 
had elapsed since tbe ratification of the treaty : and mor-e than thr'ce since 
the location of tbe i-esei'ves. The histor-y of the Creeks, during that pe- 
riod, is one of fraud and spoliation, injustice and oppression. The swarms 
of hungr-y creditors and gi-ecdy speculator's which, dui'ing this pei'iod, in- 
fested tbe nation, as well as the r-apid itrfiux of jjopulation, support the idea 
that the most valuable of the lands were disposed of before tlie execution 
of tlie contract. If we ai-e right in these conclusions, the tracts con- 
veyed were riot only inferior* in (juality, but covered with advei'se claims 
difficult to adjust; cither t() be comjironiised at a heavy expense, or liti- 
gated at an expense still greater by the ])ui'cliasers. Some time must 



92 [ Doc. No. 274. ] 

also elapse before the settlement of these claims : duringallof whirl), the 
capiial of the invcsiiiuMU must he iiiipi'nchictive. All these were rousidet-- 
atioiis which entered (lee|)lv into the minds of the contractors in acceding 
to the offer. M 'he contract was entered into and confiiined under ciicura- 
starices of more than ordinary solemnity and puhlicity. 

The individual reservees (many of them) were present, and all of them 
were represented by their chiefs, expressly authorized for that pur|»ose, 
after having ascertained the wishes of theii- towns. Kvery security was 
j)rovided for the juotection of rightful claimants. Tiie consideration was 
salislactory to tlie parties wlio r(linr|uislied their reserves, and was con- 
siilcred an e(|ui\ah'nt hy the nuist sagacious of their chiefs. It was con- 
siilered an e(|uivalent by the United States, represented by oliicers deser- 
vedly high in their estimati(»n, as is manifested by their sanction and ap- 
proval ; and, finally, it was open to all who were present. It was entered 
into under tin- full helief that it would he ratilied and approved by the 
l*rfsi<!ent : and, under that conviction, has a portion ol" tlie consideration 
been i)ai(I, and notes executed lor the remainder. Good faith, as well as 
]iublic policy, seems to reipiire that a contract thus solemnly executed by 
the United States, and satislactoiy to the j)ai'ties contracting, should nut 
be lightly set aside. 

GEO. GOLDTHWAITE, 

Jittorney for memorialists. 

In the viatler of James C. Wat son and others. 

The points upon which the validity and legality of the contract hy Wat- 
son and others wiih the Indians rest, appeal" to be the following, arising 
out of memorials which have been filed in sui)port of and against its legal 
efficacy. 

1st. NN liether the same has been made conformably with the j)rovisirms 
of the treaty made with the Indians in theyeai- 183£ ? 

2d. \N hether the contract for the i-eservatioiis of lands has been made 
in C()mj)iiance witli the conditions of the statute of frauds ? 

5d. NVheliier it has heen consummated by the ])ayme)it of the price 
agreed upon to the Indians entitled to the land, in pursuance of the pro- 
visions of the contract itself ? 

4th. Whether it shall not be considered fraudulent and inoperative, from 
the gross inadefpjacy of the j)rice to the j)r<»|)erty intended to he conveyed? 

It seems to he admitted hy the counsel for both parties, that it is abso- 
lutely necessary to the legality and validity of the conti-act, that it should 
have been made in accordance with the terms of the treaty. Hy that in- 
strument each Indian to whom a I'eservation was made was entitled toc(»n- 
vey the same, in such manner as the President of the United .States might 
j)rescribe, and subject to his approval. This is not denied hy those \\\\n 
contend lor the validity of the contract ; but tiiey contend t!ie terms of tln^ 
treaty have not been violated hy the transfei* made by the chiefs in behalf 
of the IndiansWho were entitled. 

To sup|)ort this position, it lias heen insisted — 1st. That the Indians 
have the right to delegate the power of alienation given to them by the 
treaty. I2d. That this jiower or authority need not be in writing, but 
may be by ])arol. 

In su|)port of the first position, they urge th-\t the Pn-sident, having the 
right to prescribe the manner, has the right to say that the conveyance 



[ Doc. ]Vo. 274. ] 93 

may be verbal ; and if lie were to prescribe a parol or verbal conveyance, 
it woukl be a compliance with the treaty, and therefore good and valid. 

T-.vo answers at once pi-esent themselves to this argument : 1st. That 
the President has prescribed a different nianner, to wit : that the Indian 
should ap{)r()ve tlie contract in tiie presence of the agent appointed by iiim ; 
that t!ie money should be ])aid in his presence ; and that he should cci-tify 
these facts, and that he believes (he consideration given is a fail- one. 2d. 
Tiiat if the contract were by parol, the agent could not certify and send it 
to the President for his sanction. It must necessarily be reduced to wri- 
ting, to undergo the solemnities required by tlie treaty to its legal validity. 
Alfiiougli it is contended that the conveyance may be verbal, yet this seems 
to be done as the introduction only to the agreement; that the power given 
by the Indian to anotiier person may be by parol ; for it is urged tliat the 
contract itself is in writirsg, though the power to make that contract is 
only vei-bal. 

Tiiis is really the true point <»f this part of the case. An attentive con- 
sideration of the as-gument in favor of the conti-act has not enabled us to 
find any thing which would authorize the pai'ty to convey lands re(juired 
under the treaty of 18.j2 by parol ; and thence to infer the right, by parol 
or verbal powei% to aulhoi-ize another to make a conveyance foi- tiiem. 
The counsel seemed to be fully aware of this fact, and they have therefore 
thrown themselves up()M the history of the Indians, to sliow that the chiefs 
have the absolute })o\ver over the pei-sons and property of the individual 
Indians. We are of the opinion there is some mistake in this matter. 
While the lands remained in common, the chiefs ha<l the right, by tiie cus- 
toms and usages of the nation, to convey tiiis land t(» tiie United States, 
and not to individuals ; for their usages and customs wei-e so far restrained 
by the laws of tiie United States, that the cliiefs could not, by treaty or 
contract, convey the lands to any nation or persons other than the United 
States ; but we have yet to learn that the cliiets ])ossesse(l any power over 
the i)rivate property of the Indian, which would authorize them to convey 
that property to any other person. But whether they had or not, is whol- 
ly unimportant ; they were, by the terms of the treaty, deprived of any 
such i)ower, (if they ever possessed it,) and the Indians entitled to <he res- 
ervations were authorized to convey. The chiefs, therefore, as chiefs, had 
no authority : no power or authority in writing was given to them by the 
Indians entitled ; and tiie conveyance made by them is directly contrary 
to the provisions of the treaty. We may also add, that no verbal author- 
ity wa given, for none has been or can be proved ; and we must conclude 
that none exists. 

2d. The second question to be considered brings us to an examination 
of the contract, under the statute of frauds. And here our inquiry must 
necessarily be short, for it is not even contended that there is any agree- 
ment for the sale of lands :)igned by the parties to he charged thereby, 
but that the contract is signed by an agent or agents autljorized by parol. 
In answer to this, we say that the purchaser-s Iiave exhibited no proof 
that the individual Indians ever did authorize their chiefs, or any other, to 
make such a conti-act for them ; and tliat a parol authority is iiisullicient 
to authorize an agent to convey lands, according to the statute of fiauds. 
The leading decisions upon this subject take a distinction between sales 
at auction of goods and of lands ; iioiding the auctioneer the agent of both 



94 [ Doc. No. 274. "| 

parlips. and that the entry oT tlie i)urc!jasei*s name by liim is sufticipnt sign- 
in;^ fur the |.uichiisc fit' goods, but not lands. Hut tliese decisions are con- 
lihcd to unction snlcs, and do not extent to any olhiTs ; and we a|)j)rehi'n(l 
there is a \side ditlcrence between those sahvs at auclion, and tin' pi-csent 
i'ontr-act. Tin'y are public, and genei-aily in the presence of hundii-ds. 
This contract was pi'ivate. In auction sales, the anctioneer. acting as agent, 
acfnally signs the name of the party purchasing. In tiiis contract, the 
( lucl's sign tlieir own names. In those sales, the signing «»r the name by 
the anctioneer closes the contract. Here, it is admitted, the Indians may 
refuse, after ttie chiefs having power and authority over their persons and 
|)roperty have actually dis|)osed of the latter, and that, too, as tin-y say. 
with the advice and consent of the Indians. But it is said, the United 
States themselves recogniseil this exercise of authority in the chiefs, in 
their instiuctions t(» Messrs. Benson, Martin, ami FitZ|)atrick, in i-elatioti 
to tlie reserves ; this was before the locations were ninde, which set them 
a|)ait to imlividuals, at which time the Secretary of War did contend for 
the liglit to treat with the chiefs for them. liut lie puts the right on that 
ground, to wit : that tlie locations had not tlien been inacie. \V\{\i t\i\v (\('t\'v- 
ence to the legal learning «d' the lale Se(-retary (d" War, we think the trea- 
ty gives to the individuals such private liglits, that the chiefs could not have 
relin(|uished them by treaty. That instrnujent pointed o»it where most of the 
locatiiMis should he made, " to imimie tlieir improvements ;" and the max- 
im oi' law, id certnm est (jnod redde certnni potest, gave ihem a right to 
the particular piece of land on whicli their improvements were, 'i'he lo- 
cations could do no more. We are not dis])osed to enter into tiiis coniro- 
versv, in this case, as we believe the settlement of it can have m)intlnen('e 
upon the questions connected with this contract, and growing out of it. It 
is admitted on all sides that the Indian had some interest in the land, 
either legal or e(iuitable ; that he had such an interest as authorized bin) 
to convey to the purchaser a right to olitain a fee simple title IVom the 
United States, upon the apj)roval by the ['resident of the contract and the 
com|»letion of the, payment, or a right to a fee-simple title himself, by re- 
maining in possession Hve years. And the important legal <]uestions ari- 
sing out of this contract, are : 1st. Has it been made in accordance with 
the treaty ? and, 2d, Has it been made iti compliance with the laws 
of the State of Alabama, in which tlie lands lie? We had intended todis- 
miss both of then), under tiie (irm conviction tliat snilicient had been sliowii 
to satisfy any candid and imj)artial mind that it was violating botli the 
treaty and statute of frauds ; both of whicli ai-e laws of Alabama. But 
tlie statement made by Cidonel (.,'ampbell, who assisted General Jesup ami 
the Indians in making thecontract.furnishes additional evidence of its want 
of necessary re(p)isites to establish its validity. 

In page 1 I he says. '• None of the modes of action that were open to 
(xcner.il Jesuji could have been followed without a vi(dation of the literal 
terms of the treaty, in the very point in which it is alh'ged that vi(dation 
of the treaty has occurred." In what is it alleged that violatimi of the 
treaty has occurred ? In taking from the Indian the right to sell, (which 
is guarantied by the treaty ?) — in vesting in the chief tliat authority ? I^ 
that a literal or substantial violation ? It is believed that the gentlemen who 
drew up tliat argument in favor of the jiurchasers, would believe the con- 
btituti')!! was snbstuntialhj \\\A u^^K f//cr«//«/ violated, if his private prop- 



f Doc. No. 274. ] 95 

o» t.v was taken from liiin, not for public use, but was sold either by ilie 
Goxenimciit of tlie United Staten, or by tlie State of Alabama, to another 
individna!. 

if he would, it cannot be ui'ged that onlif the lileral terms id" Ihe treaty 
were violated. But he must admit that a most substantial rigiit lias been 
laken from tlie indlN idual Indians, in violation of a substantial j)ruvision of a 
treaty made in theii* favor. it is, therefore, evident ihat the contract was 
not made in conformity with the provisions of treaty «ir of the staiutc of 
frauds. It is contended, hovvevei*, by Colonel Catitpbell, ami also by the 
counsel employed, that the necessities of the case not only permitied, but 
Jiislifies, tills dej)ai'ture from the tiraty, the statute (d" frauds, and the in- 
structi<ms given t(» General Jesuj) by the Secietary of War. Befoi-e we 
])roceed to examine the reasons given by Colonel Campbell, let us look at 
the insti-uciions of the Secretary of Wai-. In a letter to Genej-al Jesup 
under date of tlie I9th May, 18S6, he says, " I enclose the copy of a letter 
Irom Captain Page, by which you will perceive the views of that (dlicer 
on that subject, and the projjosition made liy the Uj)per Creeks. This i)ro- 
position has been appi-oved, and Captain Page advised <d' the fact; there- 
lore, so long as any part of this division of the Creeks shall lemain j)eace- 
able, you are authorized to sanction The proceeding reconiuiended. But 
whatever is done, must be dotie uilhout delay, for it is vevy inijiortant that 
their j)eo|)ie should be immediately sent off; but you will assure them that 
the Government is anxious to do them justice, and the claims of those who 
remain at peace and remove to the counli-y west of the Mississijipi will 
be duly attended lo," &.c. "There is no objection, however, in the cases 
of these friendly Indians, to jiermitting them to sell, dscrecahly to the es- 
tdhlished regulations, if the purchaser can satisfy himself that no contract 
has been heretofore made for the sale of the lands. But if this be done, lie 
must do it upon his own resi>onsibi!ity," &c. " If the arrangeujeiit stated 
by Captain i'age should take elFec t, you are authorized to select a comjie- 
tentoHirer, should the Indians desire it, to see that justice is done, and also 
to appoint a certifying agent To certify contracts, shouhl any be entered 
into as above menlii/iied." By reference to Captain Page's letter, we are 
informed what the plan was wliich was referred to in the letter of the Sec- 
retasy of War to Genei-al Jesup ; that letter is dated tlie <Jtli of May, 1836, 
stating to the Secretary of War, a talk he had held with Opothe Ytdiolo ; 
he goes on, he (Ojiothe Yoholo) says, •• 1 have come on one ])lan which I 
wisti to ad«ipt, and be <iff immediately, which is this : actimpanv of "-entle- 
uien have seen nearly ail the companies who purchased our lands, and they 
have agreed to raise a sum of money erjuivalent to the value of the lands 
we claim to have been defrauded of; they propose to pay us in iliis way, 
lor instance : I will call the persons in my town together, w hose lands have 
been taken by personating, or other frauds practised on them ; and the 
jiurchaser or agent being present, in the j)resence of the two cliiefs of each 
town, and an agent of the United States, shall pay fiver to fhe ri^^htful 
holder of tlie land a sum of money to his and the chiefs' full satisfaction- 
and in case the parties cannot agree, two respectable and disinterested 
white men shall, (one by the-chief, and one by the purchaser.) be selected to 
value theland: and theamount of their valuation under oath shall bejiaid- the 
receipt of the money, and the acknowledgment of satisfaction by the Indian, 
shall be certified to by an agent of the United States and the chiefs of the 
town ; and the title to be perfected in the name of the purchaser, written on 



96 [ Doc. No. 274. ] 

the face of tlie fust «lec(l, passed in and certified to by any of the certifying 
agents, whether the President may have i-eveised and made \oid the deeds 
approve*! or not approved, ainl consi-tpiently the hind and title helong to 
tlie original puirhasce. helopc either ol the ((.itilying agents. The chiefs 
of each town aie well actpiainted, and kr;o\v well the Iraiids and the in- 
iuied persons; and in this way we can settle all our diOiculties, and relieve 
llie Go\einnKiil of all futihei- tronhle with ns." 

From lliis talk of Opothe Yoholo, we ai'e able to ascertain wiiat the 
arrangement was, which is relei-red to in the letter to (Jeneral .Tesnp. and 
which was to he a guide to him in settiing all dilliculties with tlic Indians, 
and relieving the Government of all furtiier troidile with (hern, lie was 
not at liberty to depart from tliat jjlan; and a consideration of that plan 
will show that the Secretary of War did not feel himself at liberty to depart 
from the trei'.ty. and the regirlations which ha<l been framed under- the di- 
rection of the I'lTsident, for- the government of the certilSing agents, and 
the pirrchasers lA' lands fr-om the reservees. What are the substairtial 
pro\isions of that plan. Tliat the Indians er»title«l to i-escrvations were to 
be assembled, whose lands had been stolen, or of which they had been 
otherwise defr-auded. The person who ha«l been guilty of rlefrauding the 
Indian or his agent was to be present, and, in the pr*esence of twd jirincipal 
chiefs and tlie ollic er of the United St-.ites. the money w as to be paid to the 
])i-oper Indian, who was t<» be identilied by those chiefs. That this ar- 
rangement is to he made with the original or- iVaudiilent jjirr-chascrs, and 
those only, and that new corrtr-acts are not to be certifred, birt only the old 
ones which have been impeached. The only objection to these instructions 
of the Secretary of War, i.^, that a right of preemption is given to pt-rsons 
and to contracts which had been impeached for- fi-aud, and which, of all 
others, ought not to have been preferred. That, however, we admit, carr- 
not now be a subject of impiir-y. M'hat we would now present to your 
consideration, is, the inquiry whether- the contr'act before voir has heeir 
made in |)ursuance of those instructions ? They i-equire the Ind'uins en- 
titUd to be br-ought before the two principal chiefs of their- r-espectivc towns, 
and an oUicerof the United States, thereto be identified by the chiefs, to 
sell their lands and receive their money. 

'I'his ciMitract is not made with them, nor ai-e they pr-esent ; but is made 
with six chiefs, and no money is jiaid to the Indians entitled, but to their 
six chiefs and another chief. 

I'hese instri'.ctions i-e(piire the sale to he made to the oi-iginal or- fraudu- 
lerst purchaser, and the old contract is to be recertified. 

This contract is not made with those j)urchasers, as such; and tl»e old 
contracts are not recertified, but to five jjersons (whether those purchasers 
or not does not appear;) and this contract is substituted iir place of the old 
contract. 

These instructions were dr-awii up irr conformity with the tr*eaty and the 
laws of the State of Alaliama. This contract is in direct violation of both 
the treaty and laws ol Alabama, and cannot plea<l the poor apology of 
having been made agreeably to instructions. 

The reasot\s urged by Colonel Campbell for sanctioning it, are princi- 
])ally the necessity of an ear-ly depai-tiiie of the Imlians ; the necessity or 
(lesire of tlitrn to sell tlieir- lands hilme their de()a?-tiii-e : and the necessity 
existing for the payniiit ol'lhe money fur t'leii- lands, to enaltle llnin to pay 
their debts before they lelt this Slate, and to prcverrt them from being 



[ Doc. No. 274. ] 97 

liarasscd by slieriflTs and constables urged on by hungry creditors ; and, 
to sw ell the catalogue of calamities, to prevent women being held to bail. 

If we were to admit the existence of all these reasons, tiie admission 
could not certainly authorize a contract to be made, which is contrary to 
the treaty, contrary to law, and contrary to the express instructions of 
the Secretary of War. Those reasons, however, which have been urged by 
Colonel Campbell as moving and inducing to the making of this contract, 
do not apply. The difficulties suggested did not exist, or there were other 
and amj)le means for their removal. 

1st. Although there may have been bail-writs out against women, they 
were protected from arrest by the laws of Alabama. This contract, then, 
was not necessary to protect them. 

2d. Tiic departure of the Indians by the sale of tlieir lands, could, 
before that time, have taken place, so far as depended upon the sale. The 
letter to General Jesup was writtvii on the 19th day of May, and there 
Was amj)le time between the recei;)t of this letter and the 28th of August, 
to have made the sale of all the land embraced in the instructions of the 
Secretary of War, and in the contract now before you. Iti that letter, an 
eaily departure of the Indians is urged, and directions given to carry that 
arrangement into effect. Captain Page had made this ari-angement known 
to Eli S. Shorter, Esq., one of the purchasers of fraudulent cases, and 
attorney for others; and he wrote to the Secretary of Wa!', under date of 
the IStii May, 1836, that the pur chnsfrs accepted tlie proposition, declaring 
** they will cheeifuliy make up and pay to them a considerable sum of 
money, whenever they are ready to surrender up the land and leave the 
country." The letter of the Secretary of War was addressed to General 
Jesup, at Washiwgton, appointing him to the command of the forces em- 
])Ioyed against the Indians, and he ariived at the theatre of operations 
about the last of May or first of June. Surely there was time sufficietit, 
between his arrival and the 28th August, to carry into effect this arrange- 
ment, and have the Indians paid, and the contract recertified to the origi- 
iial purcliasers, agreeably to that arrangement and the instructions of the 
Secretary of War. That the Secretary of War did not intend to de])art 
from the substantial provisions of the treaty, and the regulations pre- 
scribed, is proved by an examination of tiie time of that arrangement ; and 
it receives additional confirmation from the suggestion made in the letter 
above referred to of Mr. Shorter, and which was not adopted by the 
Secretary of War. In that letter, he says, " As there may be much diffi- 
culty in assembling the Indian claimants, as there is much danger in 
travelling through the country, and as expedition is now essential, I ask if 
it is not proper to instruct Captain Page to ratify whatever those chiefs 
may recommend, and to assure the purchasers, that whatever Captain 
Page may do or recommend will be approved, sanctioned, and executed by 
the President." This letter must have reached Washington only a few 
days after the letter of the 19th May was written, and delivered to Gene- 
ral Jesup either a day or two after he left, or while he was in Washing- 
ton. The subject may be said to be yet before the St^cretary of War ; his 
instructions were yet fresh, and impressed upon his mind. Suggestion is 
made to alter them in a material and important part — to change tliem f/om 
the acceptance and adoption of a specific ])roposition which was then 
accepted also by the purchasers of fraudulent cases, and to give a discre- 
7 



98 I Doc. No. 274. ] 

tionary power to the commaiuling general, who was charged also with 
this business. All the difficulties of completing the proposition or arrange- 
ment, made on the part of Indians, and accepted by the |»nrchasers, were 
pointed out by a man well acfjuainted with tlicm ; and yer, with all these 
things before him, the Secretary of War did not feel liimseif at liberty to 
disn'gaid tiic treaty, and previous regiih.tions n)ade in jjursiiance theieof, 
and authorize a depaiture from those instructions. If, then, the Secretary 
of War would not do so, can a contract, made in violation of substantive 
provisions of the tieaty, of the statute of frauds, and of the instructions to 
General Jesup, be sanctioned ? 

The contract was not necessary to enable the Indians to pay their debts 
and prevent them from being iiarassed by sheiifls, constables, &.c. 

The assumption that unjust demands were made u|)oii tliem, and bail- 
writs taken out against them for thousands, where they owed only hun- 
dreds, is certainly gratuitous. Colonel Campbell could certainly have no 
means of determining their validity ; and t!>e information he received was 
most likely to come from those most interested in giving him incorrect 
information, for the purpose of deceiving him and obtaining this contract. 
The chiefs, too, appear to have been deeply interested in having the con- 
tract made. ;ind no doubt they weic more interested than we may be able 
to prove. There could be no proof of such fact exhibited to him, and none 
has been produced before this commission. That such necessity did not 
exist, is made manifest by an examination of the order of Genei-al Jesup 
under date of the 7tji or ITth August, (tlie cojiy of the order we have is 
under date of the 7lh August ; it may have been the 17th, as Colonel C. 
was at Tallassee about ten days.) aj)i)ointing Colonel Camjibell com- 
missioner. He is, by that order, authorized to stipulate that their annuity 
money for 1837 shall be paid, to enable them t<» pay their debts and those 
of their people, and to get clear of the numerous suits against them ; and 
he is further authorized to stipulate that the sum of ten thousand dollars 
shall be i)ai(i to the cliiefs, to be disposed of as they may see fit. 

Heie. then, is the sum of ^10,000, besides the sum of S37,500, the 
annuity for 1837, paid to the Indians : and the annuity for 1836, upwards 
of A4U,000, was paid at the same tin)e — and for what ? To enable them 
to i»ay their debts, and to get clear of the numerous suits against tiiem ! 
It is evident this was considered sufficient by General Jesup for that |)ur- 
pose, and we have no evidence that it was insufficient. We must, there- 
fore, conclude that the making of this contract was not necessary to en- 
able them to emigrate. Wc have additional evidence of this, from the 
fact that this contract money was not paid either to the Indians or to their 
creditors, but to the chiefs, that it might be carried off, and that the credit- 
ors migiit not get any of it. 

However plausible the reasons which have been assigned for making 
this contract, in violation of the treaty, the statute of frauds, and the posi- 
tive instructions of the Secretary of War, they either do not exist, or have 
no intluence upon it. 

A-'ain, we would remark, that even between the date of the order to 
Cohfnel Camjjbell and the date of the contract, there was ample time for 
collecting the Indians who had been defrauded, having them identified, 
having the money paid to them in the presence of the two chiefs and 
an officer of the United States, and having the old contracts recertified by 
the agent. All this could have been done: why was it not done? It 



[ Doc. No. 274. ] 90 

would have been legal and valid ; for the instructions were in accordance 
with the treaty and la\i. 

Before we (lis|)o.se of this legal branch of this case, it may be proper to 
inquire what estate the reservees had in their respective locations upon 
whi( h the statute of frauds would operate. It will not be denied that this 
contract has not been in accordance with the treaty. It is pretended that 
the Indians have delegated their power to convey to the chiefs. There is 
no proof of this fact, and we cannot admit it. What proof is necessary 
may depend upon the ai>piication of the statute of fiauds to the estate held 
by the Indians ; and therefore it becomes necessary to see whether the estate 
held by them is such a one as conies w ilhin the statute of frauds. By the 
statute of frauds, as passed in Alabama, " no action shall be brought 
whereby to charge, &c. upon any contract for the sale of lands, tenements, 
and hereditaments, in the making any lease tiiereof, for a larger term than 
one year." What, then, are lands, tenements, and hereditaments, as 
known to the law ? «» Tenement, in its proper and legal sense, signifies 
any thing which may be holden," &c. ''Hereditament includes not only 
land and tenements, but whatsoever may be inherited, be it corporeal or 
incorporeal, real, personal, or mixed." If we were to take the extensive 
signification of the woid Itereditainents, it will include ex vi /ernjiwi, every 
thing whicii may be itdieiited, whether real or personal property. It is 
enough for our purpose, then, to maintain such an estate in lands as may 
be inherited. The estate which those Indian reservees had under the 
treaty, though at first view they seem to be ?na'(/i/f, are classed and named 
in the laws. They hold an estate upon condition^ which may be either in 
fee simple or otherwise, accorditig to the nature of the grant creating such 
estate. Estates on condition, says Blackstone, " are more properly qual- 
ifications of others' estates, than a distinct species of themselves ; seeing 
that any quantity of interest, a fee, a freehold, or a term of years, may 
depend upon these provisional restrictions :" they may be either implied 
in law, or expressed in the deed or grant. 

"An estate on condition, expressed in the grant itself, is where an 
estate is granted either in fee simple or otherwise, with an express qualifi- 
cation annexed, whereby the estate granted may either commence, bt 
enlarged, or be defeated, ujmn the performance or breach of such qualifica- 
tion or condition. These conditions arc, therefore, either precedent or 
subsequent. Precedent are such as must happen, or be performed, before 
the estate can rest or be enlarged.^* Again, in page 156, *' These express 
conditions, if they be impossible at the time of their creation, or after- 
wards become impossible by tlic act of God or the act of the feoffor him- 
self," &c. " are void.*' 

The words of the treaty give these reservations to the reservees respect- 
ively, with the right to convey them under the approbation of the Presi- 
dent ; and under that approbation the purchaser receives the right to a fee- 
simple title himself, by residing upon the land five years. 

This, then, is an estate upon condition, expressed in the grant; the con- 
dition to besubse(|uently performed, to wit, either selling with the approba- 
tion of the President, or continuing in possession five years. The Presi- 
dent has no right to compel them to make a sale ; nor has he any right 
to drive them off the land within the five jears. If either condition become 
impossible by the act of God, the condition is void, and the estate becomes 
absolute. 



tt)0 [ Doc. No. 274. ] 

The deceased Indians, therefore, herame nnahle to iierform t!ie rondi- 
Itoii, by the act of God, and tlieir heirs inherit (V(in» tlieni. h would he strange 
1« Nay the Indians liave no estate in the land, or no estate roming within 
the statute of frauds ; when, upon their de^th, tlieir children itdierit ; 
%lien, by the teiins of the tri'iity itself, a purchaser from them takes fee- 
wniple estates : and \\hen, by an art tlepending upon their own vidition, 
they have a liglit to den)anil a title in fee simple. We cannot believe the 
commissioners can enleriain any doid)t that those reservees are entitled by 
treaty to those tracts of land, ar.d Indd such a title that they, and they 
only, can convey ; and that, without siirh authority, any conveyance by 
!hc chiefs, or any other person, is rontrary to the statute of frauds, and 
toid by the law ; and that these violations of the treaty and the law have 
not the sanction of instructions from the Secretary ol" War, and cannot re- 
rei\e the sanction of the I'resich'nt. AVe are next to incjiiire whether it 
kas been consnmtnated by tiie p:»_\ ment of the price agreed upon to the 
IrK'lians entitled to the land, in pnisuatice of the provisions of the contract 
itself. In tlie ])reamble it is staled •* that tlie chiefs have advised with 
their people, and that their ])eople have consented to a general disposi- 
lion,*' &c. The third article of the contract provides «» that the money 
hereinafter stijmlated to be paid, shall be paid to th'' Imlians entitled to the 
land, in the presence of a chief aod one riflicer of the United States ; and, 
until such payment be made, it shall he deposited with the certifying agent 
nf this district : the pa} tn( iit of v\hich shall be a consiirnmation of this 
contract." By the 4th, it provides that, if any Iidian, holding a parcel of 
land herein conveyed, shall refuse to carry into effect the provisions of 
this contract, in that case, a pro ralu allowance, upon the considera- 
tion herein stipulatid, shall be made t(» the parties of the third part : jiro- 
vided, that this consent shall be otdy gixen upon the consummation of 
the contract,'* >Vhal is the meatiing of tiiese two provisions ? That the 
money must be paid to the Indian entitled to the reservation; that when 
it is tendered to him, he may refuse to receive it — if he does not, he sliall 
be understood to consent ; that this ])ayment shall be made in the presence 
of a chief ami an oflicer of the United States ; that, if the Indian ac- 
cepts the money \\\\vn it is paid, it shall be consideied a consummatiiti of 
the contract. It is contended that the |)ayment to the chiefs, as entered 
on the back of the contract, is a payment in terms of tlie contract ; and 
tliat it was the duty of the Indians entitled, to enter their dissent befor-e 
tliis payment was made ; that, not having done so, they air |)recluded by 
the 4th article. Such a contract would be prepr»sterous ! Their chiefs 
Riade tlir contract : and although they ])r-etend to ha\e had the consent of 
theii- |)eople, they expressly piovide that the payment of the money to the 
Indian, arid his receiving it, shall be a consumir»ation of the contract, un- 
less he then objects. He could not ohje( t till the off.r was made to pay 
liim ; for he would not be advised of the making of the contract. The 
contract was signed after 11 or 12 o'clock on the night of the 28th 
August; and the next day, the 92th, the money was paid to the 
chiefs, and they gave a recei|)t for it. The Indian had no opportunity to 
object or consent. The contract declares the money shall be paid to him, 
m deposited with the certifying agent. The payment and de|)ositing are 
two distinct acts, and so understood by (he parties. Neither has been 
done. The Indians have not been |)aid, noi* has (here been any offer to 
pay them; nor has the money been deposited with (he certifying agent. 



[ Doc. No. 274. ] 101 

There is no proof tliat tliey have been paid; and the, proof exliibite«l 
shows tliey have not. The testimony of Mr. Taylor shows that, aftffr 
he left Tallassce with the Indians, at the request of Manowa, he paid 37 
or S8 Indians of the Chattoksof ker town. An examination of tlie books 
will sIjow that he has many contracts wii!i Indians marked for rever- 
sal, who lived in that town. But he does not pretend that the money pat4 
by him was done in the presetice of any chief, .>r any United States of- 
ficer. 

The books show 75 or 80 conti-acts marked for reversal in that town. 
Mr. Taylor swears that he had 40 or 4 5 in tiiat situation ; and the pre- 
sumption is strong, iliat only tho^e in vhich he was interested were paid, 
to make his own contract better. But we come now toconsider the last charge 
made by tlie counter-memorialists, to wit, the great inadequacy of consid- 
eration. The gross sum of seventy-five thousand dollars, one-half to be 
paid in cash, and the balance in lour months : and here we would remark^ 
that the contractors were so careful of their interests, that they caused a 
special clause to be inserted in the connact, whi( h piecluded them from the 
possibility of h)ss. The 2d article of the contract says that, when any 
contiai t shall be pieferred by the said agent, uj)on investigation, the par- 
ties of the third part shall he entitled to the same security for the consid- 
eration, as the Indian would have had but for this contract, &c. Again, 
in 4tli article : that if any Indian, holding any parcel of laud herein coh- 
veyed, shall refuse to carry into efTect the provisions of liiis contract, ira 
that case, a pro rata allowance upon the consideration herein stipulated 
shall be made to the parties of the third pait, &c. These two clauses 
plainly show the impossibility of loss on the part of the pruchasers ; and 
4thex iVe consequently driven from their subteifuge, that tlie risk which 
they ran, in not getting the aj)j)roval of the President to the contract, in 
the subsequent contest with former purchasers, either honest or pretended, 
should be taken into account in determining the adequacy of the consider- 
ation. If any valid conti'act had been made, they could requiie the mo- 
ney to be paid into the hands of an agent from whom they, standing in tlic 
place of, and occupying by the contract the precise situation of the In- 
dian, could demand it. If the Indians, or any of them, refused their as- 
sent, in that case the chiefs became liable to pay them tlie whole amount, 
should all lefuse ; or a pro rata for such as did refuse. And the comniis- 
sioners must peiceive that this would have clearly been the result, had the 
contract been complied with according to its imperative iequirements« 
That it has not been done, has been clearly proved ; aiul these purchasers 
caiiiiot now hold out the idea, that if the contract is not sustained, 
they must lose the amount of the consideration paid. If they had carrieiS 
out the contract according to its provisions, it would have been impossible 
for tliem to have lost a solitary farthings 

We assert that the consideration given foi- the right or claim of the In- 
dians was wholly inadequate to the value of the property conveyed by the 
contract. In support of this alhgation, Mr. Clough, a witness, says that 
he, for himself and his company, offeied Opothe Yoholo one hundred 
and fifty thousand dollai's for the same laud conveyed by the contract, and 
that he thought then, and still thinks, tliat the land in question was wortb 
two hundred thousand dollars. Mr. Tlnmipson, another witness, says, 
that, tVom his knowledge of the land in Jim Boy's town, he considers it 
worth at least one thousand dollars a half section. By reference to tl»e 



102 [ Doc. No. 274. ] 

abstract of CoIi)nel Ilogan, it will be fi)iin(I that (here were fifty-four 
cases in that town inatked for reversal, and wliirh were consequently em- 
braced in the contr-act : the value of tlie lands, then, in this one town, was 
fifty-four thousand dollars, which would reduce ihe price of tlie balance of 
the land to less tlian forty-one dollars a half section. A sum so low, bottom- 
ed upon testimony unimjx'ached and unimpeachable, must strike the mind 
of evei-y unj)iejudiced person, and carry with it a conviction that the consid- 
eration was gioss'.y if not fraudulently inadequate, and founded uj)on the 
ignorance of, and want of caj)acity in, the Indian to put a value uj)on the 
land. 

Having, then, established the proposition (we trust satisfactorily) that 
the consideration was wholly inadequate to the value of the lands conveyed 
by the contract, we proceed to inquire \\hether inade([uacy of considera- 
tion is a good ground, either in law or in equity, to set aside a contract ; 
and hei'e we aie not left to speculate. The books are full of authority on 
this point, all concuning and establishing, beyond (outradiction, that the 
courts will set aside conti-acts when the consideration is grossly inadccjuate. 
In the case of Nott rs. Hill, (2(1 Yernon, 27,) it was decided that the sale 
of an estate in remainder, by a sorj who was in necessity, was \oid. on ac- 
count of the gr-oss inadequacy, though the purchaser would have lost all, 
if the son had died first. The decree was affirmed on re-hearinsc ; the 
L)r'd Chancellor declaring it was an unrighteorrs bargain in the beginning, 
and that nothing could help it. In the case of Wir-eman vs. B<'ake, (2 Ver- 
non, 121,) relief was granted against a bargain on account of gross inade- 
quacy, though the pur-chaser was to lose all if the seller did not survive his 
uncle. 

In these two cases, the contingency relied upon in support of the bargains 
was held to be of rro importance. In the case under corrsideration, it has 
been shown that, had the purchasers cousummafed their cuutvact ugreedbli/ 
to its terms, they could have lost notliing. How nruch more for-cibly, their, 
does the want of adequate consideration, ivilhout the contingency of losSf 
aj)ply to it? In Baugh vs. I'lice, decided irr the Exchequer, and reported 
in 3 Wilson, 320, r-elief was given, and actual corrveyancy set aside, though 
the inaderpracy did rrot exceed one-half the value. Tliis, said Chancellor 
Desaussiei*, irr commenting upon it, " is a very importarrt case, (4 Eqirity 
Rep.) 690. In the case under considei'ation, the price paid is jiroved to be 
far less than one-half <»f the value of the |)ropcrty conveyed." In the case 
of Chesterfiold vs. Jansorr, Lor-d Chancellor Ilar-dwicke said : "Tneieare 
har'd unconscionable bargains which have been corrstr'ued fraudulent, and 
this corrit will relieve against |)iestrmptive fraud ; to take advantage of 
another man's necessity, is equally bad as takir)g advantage of his weak- 
ness." Fraud is pr-esinned fr-orn the cir-cumstarrces arrd condition of the par- 
ty's weakness and necessity on the orre side, and extortioir and avar-ice on 
the other ; and mei'ely from Ihe intrirrsic uncorrsciorrableness of the bar- 
gain. How far- the parallel holds good in the case above referred to and 
th»* case rrnder consider-ation, we leave the commissioners to d< terniiiie. In 
the case of Gwyrrrr vs. Heaton, (l Uio. C. C. 1,) it was decided by Loi-d 
Thur-low that tlie grant of a reversionai-y rent, charged alter the death of 
plaiiitiflT's lather, who was old and infirm, npoir unreasonable terms, 
shorrld be set aside, althoirgb the defendarrt was invited irrto the baigaiir by 
the plaintiir, after- consultation with his friends, and the same ter-nrs offer-ed 
to other persons ; and although there was a contingency by which llie de- 



[ Doc. No. 274. ] 103 

fendant might have lost all his advances, and though the disproportion was 
not enormous. Tlie Lord Chancellor said the ground for relief was gross 
inequality; that the charges of fraud and oppression were not proved; that 
the vendor made the offer to the |)urchaser, who accepted in the very shape 
offered, and did not labor to lower the ternjs; there was no misleading the 
judgment of the vendor, nor tampering with his poverty. In the case now 
under the consideration of the commissioners, it is testified by Mr. Tay- 
lor,oneof their own witnesses, that some, if not all the purchasers under the 
contract, (and the report of Colonel Hogan will show that all of them) were 
interested previous to the date of the contract, in lands marked for reversal. 
It must, therefore, be aj)parent that their own acts, in connexion with oth- 
ers, drove the chiefs to tlie necessities (which the contract says existed, 
and wliich Colonel Campbell and General Jesupsaid existed) to make the 
contract. Have not the purchasers under the contract, by their own acts, 
in connexion with others, driven the chiefs to accept a consideration so 
grossly inadequate that it would be impossible to state it to a man of com- 
mon sense, without producing an exclamation at the inequality of it? Mr. 
Clough says he considers the land as worth two hundred thousand dollars ; 
and Mr. Thompson says that he considers fifty-four of the half sections 
as worth fifty-four thousand dollars. Can any man be found who would 
not exclaim at the great inequality of foity-one dollars apiece for the 
balance of the half sections, in comparison with the real value? In Mort- 
lock vs. Buller, (10 Vesey, 292,) Lord Eldon refused to decree specific ex- 
ecution of a contract for the sale of land, when the inadequacy did not ex- 
ceed half the value, though there was no imputation on the conduct of the 
buyer. In Day vs. Newman, (10 Vesey, 300,) Lord Alvanley refused to 
decree specific execution of a contract in a case clear of all fraud, when 
the inadequacy was very gross, being about half the value. In Tilley vs. 
Pars, (10 Vesey, 301,) the court, ujmn the mere consideration of it being a 
hard bargain, will not enforce it. In Pickett ts. Logan, Lord Chancellor 
Eldon gave relief to the plaintiffs, and set aside the agreement and the final 
conveyances, and even the fine conveying the estate to the defendant, upon 
the ground of gross inadequacy of price and the vendors being in distress, 
and ignorant of the real interest and its value, and not j)roperly protested 
by counsel, though a great lapse of time had occuiied. In this case 
the answer denied that the plaintiffs were drawn in by any advantage ta- 
ken of their ignorance or distress. The contract under consideration ad- 
nuts that frauds had been perpetrated upon the holders of land under the 
said treaty, "whereby their titles had become involved with diffirulties, their 
rights jeopardized, and confidence in their security impaired," kc. ; that 
they are about to remove to their homes in the West, to the end. &c., of ob- 
taitiing something for their lands, &c. The ])roof shows that some if not 
all the parties to the contract had been charged with perpetrating the 
frauds complained of. 

The evidence in the case of Pickett vs. Logan, stated that the deeds 
were read and explained to the plaintiff by the attortiey, and they were 
made to undejstand the nature and value of the property ; but they were 
in great poverty and distress; that they were very ignorant people; and 
though some description of the property was given in the deeds, it was not 
so full as it should have been. The price being so inadequate, (about one- 
fifth its value.) the Chancellor had no difficulty in giving the relief sought. 
In the contract of Watson and others, there is no evidence that the con- 



lOi f Doc. No. 274. ] 

tract ever was explained to llie parties inaking if, nor tiiat tliey were made 
to iiiiderstaiid the natiiie and value (d the piojX'ily com eyed away. The 
coniract admits ihey were in poverty and dihtresp, and the argument or 
explanation of Colonel Cam[)bel] confirms it. From the testimony, the 
inad'<|uacy of consideration is about the same in this (ase as in the case 
of Pi( kett vs. Logan, above relerrcd to. If justice and ecjuity retpiired 
that the ci>nliact should be set aside in liic one case, it equally recjuires ii in 
the other. The cases above rel'erred to, were lecentjy con^ideted in the court 
«»fe(|uity in South Carolina, in the case ofThos. Butler et (il., vs. Haskell, 
(4 E«)uiiy Reports, 652.) and conlirmed by the court (d" appeals ; Chan- 
cellor Desaussier, who pronounced the decree in the case, declaring that 
the en:inent men who have sat in chancery have gradually apj)lied the 
great principirs of e<|uiiy, on which rtlief is granted, to every case when 
the dexterity of intelligtMit men had obtained bargains at an enormous and 
unconscij iitious disprojjoiti* n, from the ignorance, the weakness, oi' the ne- 
cessities of others. The case of Watson and othei-s is not without the 
pale of these decisions. The laws of the country should be equally ad- 
ministered to the poor and to the rich, to the red man and to the white 
man. Arguing upon these j)i inci|)les, from every view of the case wiiicli 
we have been able to take, we are led to the irresistible conclusion, that, 
to establish thi.^ contract would be conti-ary to law, coutraiy to equity and 
good conscienc<> ; and that it ought not, therefore, to be approved by the 
President of the United States. 

S. JONES, 
JOS. BRYAN, 
JNO. H. I'EIERS, 
HKNRY Til OM ['SON, 
Jttorneys for memorialists. 



To the honorable T. Hartley Crawford and Jilfred Balch, commission- 
ers of the United States for the ijivestigatioji of frauds upon the In- 
dians of the Creek tribe holding reservations, (^t. 

The memorial of James C. Watson, Edward Hanrick, William Walker, 
Peter C. Harris, and John Peabody, res[)ccl fully sheweth : 

That on the 28ili of August, 1836, tliey entered into a contract with 
several chiefs of the Creek nation, acting on behalf of the individuals of 
their tribo, whose claims to lands have either been certified and marked 
for re\er)-al, or which had been sold and certified without authority in the 
agents of the United States ; said tracts being contained in the reports of 
th« investigating agents ; and also the individuals of their tiibe who had 
not s(dil or disposed of their reserves under" the treaty of April 4, 1832, 
for the jmr ( base of said tracts of land. 

Youi- memorialists further stale, that they wer-e called upon by Major 
General Jcsup. who then commanded the arnry of the South, to know upon 
what ter ii;s tliey would bity said lands ; and that the piircliase was made 
rtndei' his s^ticiioti, and with tiie aj)pr'oval of the ollrcer- who represented 
the United States in 'he execution of the contract. Your memor'ialists 
further state, that no fraud, artifice, combination, or unfair- practices wer-e 
employed by them to obtain said ciitract. I'ltcy further state, that the 
particular terms of said contract were arranged between the agents of 



[ Doc. No. 274. J 105 



the United States and themselves; that they did not consult or advise 
with the Indian chiefs aCoiesaid, but with the officers uf the United States, 
who communicated the jjropositions of the Indians to them, and received 
their answers for the Indians. 

They further state, that tliey paid to Captain John B. Page thirty- 
seven tliousand five liutidred (hiilais, and executed their note to him for the 
same amount, payable fdur months after date to said Page, in trust for the 
Indians, as a full coMsummation on their i)art of said contract. 

They furthei* state, ihat it was provided in said contract that the con- 
sent of each individual liolding said land should be presumed, unless he 
should dissent before the consummation of the contract. 

Your memorialists know of r.o cases of dissent, and pray that said con- 
tract be executed, by aj>p(>iiitirig them a title to the lands therein specified. 

They are informed that }ou liave the originals or copies of tlie reports 
of (he investigating agents, as well as the said contract, which they pray 
may be referred to for the natuie or extent of their claim. They state that 
theie are some of the contracts contained in their reports to which they 
are paities, and would pray that titles be confirmed. 

There are niatiy contracts that your memorialists believe to have been 
made in fraud of (he rights of the Indians located upon the reserve; they 
pray tliat they may be permitted to contest these contracts. 

There are (ontracts which your memorialists believe to be fair and bona 
fide, and the purchasers willu g to pay for the same. They pray, as to 
them, that the article of the contract in that behalf be enforced. 

They pray that no contract be certified, witliout a ncjtice to them of the 
application. They pray, finally, that the lands for which no valid out- 
standing bonds have been taken, may be appraised and adjudged to them 
accoi ding to the terms of the contract. 

GEO. GOLDTHWAITE, 

Jittorne'i) for memuriulists. 

State or Alabama, 

Macon county. 

To Thomas Hartley Craivford and Jilfred Batch, Esqs., CommiS' 

sioners, <5'C. 
The memorial of Ware, Dougherty, and Company, and others, respect- 
fully sheuefh : That your memorialists have been engaged since the 
ratification of the treaty, made between the United States and the Creek 
nation of Indians in 1832, for the cession of lands lying between the State 
of Georgia and the then temporary line of the State of Alabama, in pur- 
chasing lands reserved, and located to the chiefs and heads of families of 
said Cieek natinii. That, among other lands, they have purchased many 
tracts lying within McHenry's district, from the proper and genuine Indi- 
ans ; but of which, certain individuals had before attempted to defraud 
said Indians, by hiring or otherwise piocuring other Indians to personate 
the rightful owners of said reservations, and in their name to go before 
the certifying agent appointed by the President of the United States, and, 
in his presence, to sign and contract for said reservation, and to receive 
money for the same. These contracts maile with your memorialists are 
ready to be shown, whenever the commissioners may require them. And. 
youi' memorialists further show, that on the twenty-eighth day of August, 
in the year of our Lord one thousand eight hundred and thirty-six, a cer- 
tain contract was made and entered inte by John A. Campbell, Esq., an 



106 [ Doc. No. 274. ] 

aecnt anncinted bv Major General Jesnp on the ,.art of the United States, 
six Indians prole'ssing t.. be chiefs in the Crerk .uU.on, and ^^e .ndmdu- 
als for the sah' and purchase of the claim of the Indians to all he lands 
included and en.braccd in contracts alleged to be fraudulent a'"' ;"'^'-l<^,'J 
f..r reversal bvthe agent of the United States, I> ing NMthin Dr. Mel enrv s 
district, Nvith the exception of certain tosvns therein excepted ; and lurlher 
rieht of pre-emption to all the unsold tracts belonging to the Indians under 
the treaty, and alsothose belonging to the families of .lead Indians who were 

cntitled,"and lor which the sum of seventv-five thousand d.dlars was stipu- 
lated, one half to be paid in cash, and the residue in four months : and wliicli 
contract was, on the same day. sanctioned by Major General Jesup, sub- 
iect to the ratification of the President of the I nited States. An.l >ou, 
memorialists woul.l further show, that there were six hundred «>"! <• ty 
two contracts marked for reversal by the agent of the Lnited States, 
uhich will make the average value of each case erp.al to the sum of one 
hundred and fifteen ^|^ dollars, without allowing any part ol the P"«'chase 
money, as a consideration for the right of pie-emption secured by the 
said contract to the said individuals. 

And your memorialists further represent, that the said con ract was 
made contrary to the provisions of the treaty, and without authority ot 
law, or from the Indians, whose right and property Nvere intended to be 
transferred: and is destructive of the rights and interests of your memori- 
alists, and many other of the good citizens of this State, and ought not 
to receive the sanction of the President of the United States, for the fol- 
lowing reasons, to which your mem..rialists would take leave respectfully 
to draw the attention of the commissioners: 

1st. For that, by the second article of said treaty, ninety chiefs of said 
Creek nation were allowed to select one section each, and every other head 
of a familv to select one half section each; which tracts were to be re- 
served from sale for their use, for the term of five years, unless sooner 
disposed of by them ; and those selections were to be so made as to include 
the improvements of each pers.m Avithin his selection, if practicable And 
by the third article of said treaty, " the persons selecting the same wee 
authorized to convey the tracts so selected to any "J '^';. 1'^';^""/;;',Vh o 
consideration, in such manner as the President should direct. And b) the 
fourth article of said treaty, the persons entitled to these selectmns and 
desirous of remaining, were entitled to receive patents for the same in fee 
simple from the Unifed States. These articles of the treaty are s. pan 
and explicit, that c^cvy candid an.l reasonable mind n.ust admit that these 
tracts, which had ther^f.fore been held hy the nation in common, were set 
apart to individuals, to whom an inchoate right was secured, which might 
be conveyed to other persons by iliem, and by them only, wiih the appn.ba- 
tion of the President of the United States within five years from the date 
of the treaty, and which, hv their continuance in possession for hat 
length of time, would be ripened into a fee-simple title in them and the.r 
l.ei?s. If this construction he correct, (and we ^^"""^ ^ rTi o'^hiofs 
successfullv controverted,) such a title was veste. in each of tl'<"^e H efs 
and heads of families as could not be .liveste.l hut by themselves, ^'Xl'^' I'X 
sale or bv removal. A sale, with the approbation of the President would 
c.nvey a'right to the title to the purchaser, and a voluntary removal heloc 
such snie, and within five years would revest all the right secured by the 
treaty to those Indians in the United States. Whatever right the nation, 



[ Doc. No. 274. ] 107 

or the chiefs, as the representatives of the nation, may have had to dispose 
of those tracts of land before the treaty, was relinquished by that treaty ; 
and all the riglits over the land before possessed by the nation became 
vested, by tiie express words of the ti-eaty, in tiie United States, and sub- 
modo, in the chiefs and heads of families. Tiie conclusion, then, is irresis- 
tible, that the nation or cliiefs, as tlieir representatives, having parted with 
all their rights, could not possibly convey any to those purchasers, or any 
other individuals. Again, by a law of the United Stales, no individual, 
or number of individuals, can be authorize*! to treat witli the Creek nation 
for a cession ot" their lands, or any poi'tion of them. If we were, there- 
fore, to admit the right of the chiefs, as chiefs and representatives of the 
nation, to sell and dispose of the property of the individuals of the nation, 
a cession of the lands belonging totlie nation could not, by law, be made to 
any individual, or, indeed, to any other nation than the United States, or 
some one of the States. Tlje dilemma, then, in which the j)urchasers are 
placed, is truly unpleasant and difficult. If the land belonged to the nation, 
it could not be conveyed to any individuals. If it belonged to individuals, 
then the chiefs, as representatives of the nation, could not take from those 
individuals the rights guarantied to them by the treaty. In the pream- 
ble of the contract it is conceded that each head of a family was entitled 
to a half seclioj) of land, and that the same has, pursuant to the provisions 
of the treaty, been allotted to him ; but it seems to be insisted that reasons 
of state authorize a divestment of their rights, and a disposition by the 
nation of those reservations. We do not see the force of those reasons, 
nor can we believe they will be considered of sufficiejjt legal force to take 
away from the Indians their vested rights. It will not be denied that pri- 
vate property may be taken for public uses, upon the payment of a just 
compensation; but we cannot believe that clause of the constitution has 
ever received, or ever will receive, a construction which would authorize 
any person in authority, however high, to take away the property of one 
individual and sell it to another ; nor can we believe that the distinguished 
individual who is now Chief Magistrate of these United States would wish 
to i)lace himself above tiie laws and the constitution, and arrogate to him- 
self such rigiit, or countenance any construction, which would seek to place 
such dangejous power in his hands. 

2d. The contract alleges that the chiefs who made the contract have 
advised their people to accede to a general disposition of their lands, and 
have obtained their consent to remise, release, and foieverquit claim, &c., 
to all and each of their right, title, and interest, and cluim. Now, if we 
were disposed to avail ourselves of a strictly legal objection, we might 
properly uige, tliat, altiiough such consent may have been given, yet the 
said chiefs have never in pursuance of such consent, actually remised, 
released, &c., the right or claim of said Indians. But we would prefer 
to call your attention to more substantial objections to this part of the 
contract. There is no evidence that any such consent was given, by the 
Uidians having the right to the reservations, to the chiefs to dispose of them 
in this manner. The fourth ])rovision in the contract, impliedly, if it does 
not |)ositively, forbids such a conclusion. If the Indian had consented, and 
autliorized such a conti-act befoi-e it was made, he could not be permitted 
to refuse afterwards. If he did not, then it is necessary to show his consent 
to the contiact after it was made. The purchasers certainly should be 



108 [ Doc. No. 274. ] 

held to prove one m- tlie otlicr. By the regulations prescribed hy tiie 
President, the consent of an Indian entitled to a reservation must be in 
writing, signed by him in the presence of the agent. We will not requiic 
tiieni to be luM to ibis strictness; but we sutel) cannot be considered un- 
reas(»nabN', wlien wo ncjuirc some hgal »">idenceor fiiis consent to the dis- 
j)osilion of ihe land sicured to them by tbe treaty. AVidi such consent, the 
sale migiit be \alid; without, it cannot be legal. None lias}et been shown, 
and we |)resume none exists- as it is so important that it would not be 
williheid if it could be produced. 

S(\. N^ e will not, however, content ourselves with urging the entire 
abseiKeol'all evidence of such consent to the sale, wliich the parties claim- 
ing under this contiact are bound to j)roduce; but we urge that, so far 
from any consent having been given by the Indians entitled to the lands, 
most of them were not even represented by the chiefs of their towns, 
or any other person ; and that the chiefs who were present, an<l signed the 
contract, were either deceived, or acted without advising with and obtain- 
ing the consent of the individuals in the towns to which tbe chiefs belonged. 

There are twenty-four chiels belonging to the towns includtd in Doctor 
McHenr}'s district, in which the lands lie which ha\e been convened by 
the contract. Ninety principal c hiefs aie recognised by the treaty as 
belonging to Ihe nation; twenty-four of these belong to the towns included 
in this contrac t. Only six cliiels have signed the contract. The most for 
which the purchasers can possibly contend, in the absence of all proof of 
the consetit of the Indian to this sale of his reservation, is the implied au- 
thority which the chief of the town has over the individuals of tliat town. 
Of the six chiefs who signed the contract, four belong to the Tuckabatchee 
town, one to 'riilobthlocco or Jim Boy's tow n, and one to tbe Tallassee 
town. The chief of the last town declared, when he signed the contract, 
that he had not the assent of his people. Jim Boy has since declareci that, 
although he signed the conti-acN he did not understand it; and he therefore 
could not have befoie obtained the consent of his peoj)le. And the 'I'ucka- 
batcbee chiefs, when they assembled tbeii- people to pay them the |)ro rata 
valuation, were told l)y their people that they had made no sale, and would 
receive no money : nor did they receive any from them. The first is 
proved by the entry of General Jesup on the contract, which enlr-y is 
signed by him ; and the others will be pr'oved to the satisfaction of the 
commissioners, by competent evidence. There ai'e seventeen towns in- 
cluded in the ciitract; only three have been [jretended to have been repre- 
sented by tlicir- chiefs; and they will be pro\ed to have acted without any 
aut!iorit> : hfteen towns were, theiefor'e, wholly unr-epi-esented. 

4th. By the thiid provision, the money stipulated to be paid was to be 
paid to the Indian entitled to llie land, in the presence of the chief and an 
ofticer- of the United States; and this contract cannot be consummated till 
that is done. J here is not the slightest exidence that any payment has 
been made to a single Indian entitled to the land. The proof exlubited 
sliows that it lias not, and cannot be done. It has been paid to the six 
chiefs wlio signed the c< ntr-act and to Tu'-conee Iladjo, a chiei of the 
Fish-|(ond town, who never signed the contiact, whose town is not in 
M( Henry's district, and whose people were not entitled to an acrr. If we 
may be allowed the expression, it appears like an attempt on llie part of 
these chiefs either to swindle their jjeople out of their money, who have al- 



I Doc. No. 274. J 109 

ready been defrauded of tlieir lands, or to swindle the purcliasers. Be 
this as it may, the Indians v\lio were entitled to the land jjave never re- 
ceived one dollar of tite money, and in all probability never will. 

5th. The consideration given t'oi* the claim or right of the Indians is 
wholly inadequate to the value of the property conveyed by the contract. 
By the report of Colonel Hogan, there are six hundred anfl fifty-tw) cases 
reported for reversal; the average value of each would be one hundred and 
fifteen dollars and three cents. There are \evy few tracts uow hcl(»nging 
to the Indians in McHenry's distiict worth less than that price, and there 
are many worth eight hundred or one thousand dollars. Besides, with this 
average value for each of the contested claims, there will be nothing paid 
for the right of pre-emption of the unsold tracts, and those behmging to 
families of rcservees wlio died before their lands were sold. We are not 
loft to our opinion upon this subject. An offer was made to Opothe 
Yoholo of one hundred and fifty thousand dollars for the same lands con- 
tained in this contract. If General Jesup was acting in beiialfof the 
Indians, to protect their rights, or if Mr. Campbell was appointed by him 
in pursuance of the letter of the Secretary of War, '* at the desire ot the 
liulians to see tliat justice was done them," it would ai'gue gi'eat obliquity 
of intellect to believe that justice was done in advising and inducing thejn 
to take seventy-five thousand dollars, instead of double that sum, for the 
same lands conveyed by that contract. At the same time that this con- 
tract was negotiating, there were pui-chasers with ample means of payment, 
and Indians desirous to convey, under the sti[)ulations pi'escribed by the 
President, the lands belonging to them ; and they were not permitted to do so 
f )r want of an agent to witness the cotitracts and to certify them. We will not 
further utge upon the commissioners the total inadequacy of tha conside- 
ratioti paid to the value of the property conveyed. We feel satisfied our- 
selves of that fact, and believe it must be apparent to all. We feel assured, 
also, that it will appear manifest that the Indians entitled to the land have 
not been paid any money, and are not likely to be paid ; that the chiefs 
who made and signed the contract, have acted without authority from 
the Indians; that the President cannot approve it, without a total disre- 
gard of the constitution and laws of the land atid of the rights of the In- 
dians; and that its sanction will be a consummation of the greatest fraud 
that has yet been practised upon that poor deluded people. 

SEABORN JONES, 
WM. DOUGHERTY, 
JOSEPH BRYAN, 
JOHN H. PETERS, 
HENRY THOMPSON, 
Attorneys for memorialists. 

The following is submitted to the commissioners, in reply to the argu- 
ment of the counter-memorialists, in the matter of James C. Watson and 
others : 

It is contended by the counter-memorialists, that it is necessary to estab- 
lish by proof that the individual reservees delegated to the chiefs signing 
the contract the authority to dispose of the lands embraced by its provisions. 
If this was a case in which the two parties only (the chiefs signing, and 
the grantees) were concerned, it is admitted that the authority of the chiefs 
thus to dispose of the tracts selected by the individual reservees would be 



no [ Doc. No. 274. J 

necessary to be established by proof. But the contract under considera- 
tion is executed by the United Slates as well as the Indian ; and, in the 
cthcial (listhaige of their duties, it is not to be supposed that the oflicers 
representing the Government on that occasion, and ie(|uired by every ob- 
ligation of duty to prevent the practice of fraud anil imposition, would 
permit the exercise of an authority by the chiefs, if any doubt existed as 
to the delegation of this authority to thcnj by the individual reservees. It 
was for them to supervise, direct, and control tlie contract, in such a man- 
ner as would protect the interests of the iridiviilual reservees, and fulfil 
the substantial reijuisitions of the treaty. It is to be presumed that the 
degree of evidence ofTer-ed to ihose who represented the United States in 
the contract, was sulficient to convince their minds that the reservees au- 
thorized the chiefs contracting to dispose of iheir' interest in the reserves. 
Again : the same proof has been made in relation to the present contr-act, 
which is required by the pi-escribed regulations of the Government, or 
which is necessary under the treaty ; by the third article of which, it is 
required that the "contracts" for the sale of selected lands shall be cer- 
tified by some jicrson appointed by the President for that pui pose. The 
contract, by i-eference to the same article, is a conveyance on a fair con- 
sideratifin. To comply v\rth the treaty, therefore, son»e olliccr", appointed 
5y the President, must certify to the conveyance and consideration, which 
constitute the contract. Is a greater degree of evidence necessary in this 
case ? Or;e of the highest othcers of the Government, appointed for that 
purpose, sanctions the contract, and thus certifies the same. This evidence 
is before the commissioners, and is of as high a character* as that on which 
the other contracts for the sale of Creek reserves are approved. 

But it is said that this contract is in contravention of the instructions of 
the Government to General Jesup; and that, being rontrary to their express 
instirictions, it would be unwise and impolitic in (he Gover-nment to sanc- 
tion it by their- apjnoval. It is to be reiollected that hy far the most im- 
portant duty that devolved upon that officer (General Jesup) at me termi- 
nation of the Creek hostilities, was the immediate removal of the tribe to 
the country assigned them west of the Mississippi. AHolhcr object of in- 
struction was the raising of an Indian for-ce to assist in the prosecution of 
the war against the Seminoles. Howwere these two objects, the subject 
of direct instructions, to be effected? The Indians were unwilling to r-e- 
move ; and they were equally averse to raising the force r'eijuired by the 
Government, withowt the settlement of certain pr-climinaries, which ar'e 
fully stated in the communication of Colonel Camjibell ; and, among these, 
the settlement of their disputed land claims was insisted upon ; and, from 
the statements of their chiefs, these claims formed the pr incipal objection 
to their immediate emigration. Under these circumstances, some dispo- 
sition was necessary to be made of these claims, before the main object of 
instructions could be effected. The Go\ernmerit demanded the immediate 
removal of the Creeks : and to adopt the mode prescribed by the Secretary 
of War, as to the dis|)osition of the selections made under the treaty of 
1832, or that which had been suggested by Captain Page, and recommend- 
ed by the Department to General Jesup, would bring with it a delay ren- 
dering the requisitions of the Govirnment, as to the immediate removal 
of the indians, impossible. 'I'lie instructions v\ere two-fold. The fir'st 
coni( ni|)lated the imincdiiitc removal of the tiilie ; and the second, the set- 
tlerMut of their land claims. If the particular mode rec(jriimcnded by 



[ Doc. No. 274. ] 144 

the Dopartment in relation to the latter object would, by a strict and lit- 
eral pursuance of its tet ins, eitlier prevent or endanger the former, no 
objection can be peiceived to the adopting some otiier mode than that re- 
commended by the Department, if it was necessary to effect the end pro- 
posed, provided it v\as equally in agreement with the spirit and mean- 
itig of the treaty, and in accordance with the laws of Alabama. Since 
the suggestion of the mode by Captain Page, (before referred to,) the re- 
lation between the Government and tiie Indian had been, in some degree^ 
changed by tlic hostilities scarcely tei'minafed. As far as the rights of 
the Indian is concern* d, it is obvious that no injury could result from pur- 
suing a mode differing from that directed by the Department, provided 
the rights stdemnly secured to them by the treaty were observed and 
respected. I'his, we apprehend, is the important question. And when 
once settled that the terms of the contract are in agreement with the 
provisions of the treaty, it seems to follow that it should receive the sanc- 
tion of the Executive. Motives of expediency and policy induced its exe- 
cution. The Government is not only a party to the instrument, but has 
taken a benefit under it, by the immediate reduction of an expense esti- 
mated by General Jesup at near ten thousand dollars a day ; and also the 
procurement of the Indian force ; both of which, aIthoug!i they may not 
be included in the terms of the contract, are the consequences of its exe- 
cution. Tlie interests of third |)arties have become deeply involved. On 
the faith of the Government the contract was executed ; and to them the 
good failh of the Government is j)ledged for its ratification. 

If, however, the contract is in violation of the treaty, or the laws of 
Alabama, in which State the contract was made, no considerations of ne- 
cessity or policy should induce the sanction of the Executive to it. 

^Ve are thus brought to a consideration of the arguments of the counter- 
memorialists, as to the validity and legality of the provisions of the con- 
tract, with reference to the treaty of 1832, and the statutes of Alabama. 

On the first point, it is contended that the contract under consideration 
is in violatiorr of the third article of the treaty, which, they say, forbids the 
disposition of the reserves to be made by any other than ** the persons se- 
lecting the same;" and the I'eason assigned in srrppoit (»f this branch of 
the argument is, that the conveyance by any other person than the res- 
ervee, aithoiigb he be fully author-ized by hinr, is in violation of the "lit- 
eral terms" of the article of the treaty above referred to. 

Admitting, for the pr-esent, that the exercise of a delegated authority 
in the sale of the reserves is a departure from the '* literal terms " of the 
treaty, the objection is fully answered by showing it to be within the 
spirit and meaning of that instrument; and no other construction can be 
placed on the third article, than that the Indian should be allowed to dis- 
pose of his reserve to the best advantage and for his own benefit ; and this 
end can be attained as well, and in many cases better, by the delega- 
tion of this power to another-, tharr by the exercise of it in person. In some 
cases it would be difliicirlt or imi)ossible for the reservee to execute this 
power otherwise than by agent, as in the case of absence and infirmity; 
and could that be regar-ded as a fair and liberal construction, which would 
deprive the party of an intended benefit, depentlent upon his will, because 
the exei'cise of that will was manifested thr'ough the agency of another I 
If it isclear that the individual r^eservee consented to the sale, and received 
a fair consideration, it is all tiiat the treaty requires. 



112 [ Doc. No. 274. ] 

It is (loubtful wlictlier a conveyance executed by an agent c;\n properly 
be considered a departure even fi-om the '* literal terms" of the treaty. 
The execution of conveyances by agents falls witliin ot>e of the first max- 
ims of the law; and it is believed that not asinglecase can be piodured, in 
^\hich a mere executoi'y act cannot be performed by agent. Kveii trust 
])owers, jealously as they are regarded by the law, can be executed by at- 
torney, unless a personal trust and confidence is implied, or in discretion- 
ary case>*, \Nhich, from their natuie. cannot be delegated. In this case, the 
individual reservees are willing to dispose of theii- interest for a speci- 
fied sum ; the j)iice is agreed upon, and they aufhorize their chiefs to exe- 
cute the conveva?>ce. It is the act of conveyancing alone which is delega- 
ted, and in that act is implied neitlier confidence nor discretion ; the discre- 
tion, if any exists, as to the mr)de or manner of conveyancirig, being by the 
treaty committed to the President ahme. If these conclusions are coi-rect, 
it may be asked, of what use are the woids of the second ai-ticle of the 
treaty, iM'oviding that the selections "maybe ccmveyed by the persons 
St'Kcting the same ?'* We atiswei", they define only by w liom the disposing 
])ower may be exercised ; but they do not forbid the exercise of tliat pow- 
er by another. Tne woi-d "convey," immediattly pre(eding, cannot give 
a diflTerent meaning ; because what the conveyance is to be, is by the same 
article left entirely at the discretion ui' the Picsident. If the woi'd *• con- 
vey " is to be taken in its most refined and technical sense — if by it is meant 
an instrument of writing alone, why refer to the discretion of the President 
in \^hat manner this conveyance Khf»iild be made ? If a specified mode was 
defined by the treaty, the special mo !e must be |»ursued, to the exclusion 
of all others, and would e(jually pteilude the appointment of any other by 
the President. We insist, thereloie, that the mode of conveyance, whether 
in person or by agent, in writing or by parol, is not pi-escribed by the 
treaty, but is left entirely at tin* discreti<m of the Piesident, for him to 
adopt that course which would most efTectually guard the disposing pow- 
ei" of tlie rcsei'vee fi'om fraud and imposition. 

That the President has prescribed a course differing from that pursued 
by Gencrul Jesup in the present instance, is no argument against the va- 
lidity or legality of the contract, considered with reference to the provi- 
sions of the ti'caty. The dii-ecting and controlling power is vested in the 
President ; and it will not be denied that he can change or modify the reg- 
ulations for the sale of reserves as he may tiiink proper, or as necessity 
or circumstances may refjuire. As to the second point, it is contended by 
the counter-memoiialists that the contract falls within the statute of frauds 
of Alabama, and is consequently void. In reply, the memorialists urge 
that the treaty commits to the Presidewt the sj)ecies as well as the form 
of the contract, w ithout reference to tlie statute of frauds : that, without his 
sanction, the contract is migatory and void, deriving its existence as a va- 
lid conveyance only from the time of his approval. 

But the memorialists further insist on this, subject, that apart from 
the treaty, upon principle, the p«)\\rr to alienate the inteiest possessed 
by the reservee can by him be didegated to another by parol. The stat- 
ute of frauds of Alabama is almost identical with the English statute 
29th Chailes II, on that subject ; and utidcr this section, it has been deter- 
mined that in certain cases, a paiol or verbal authoiity to con'ract is suffi- 
cient. Does the case of Watson and others fall within these cases ? 

It is contended, on the other part, that these adjudications refer only to 



[ Doc. No. 274. ] 113 

sales at auction, and that between such cases and the present a wide 
distinction exists. The distinction which is stated to exist between 
the two cases is, that those are public, these private ; there, the agent 
signs tlie name of his principal ; in this case, the agents have signed their 
own names. 

The distinction first staled docs not exist, as the testimony on the part of 
the counter-memorialists shows, which states that the terms of the con- 
tract were under consideration for some days ; that the witnesses them- 
selves possessed full knowledge of the salej that many others were pre- 
sent. From their testimony, the publicity of the sale is clearly shown. 
This is also confirmed by the statement of Colonel Campbell, as to the 
manner in which the negotiation was conducted. The cases cited by the 
counter-memorialists will be found, on examination, not to have been de- 
cided on either of the above giounds, but on principles of necessity and 
public policy in those particular cases. Since the determination of those 
cases, the authorities have gone much further ; and as the law at present 
stands, the signature of the auctioneer only, or even his clerk, is held to 
be a sufficient signing within the statute. [Coles vs. Trecothick, 9 Ves. 
251; Blorevs. Sutton, 3 Meiiv. 246; Blagden vs. Bradbear, 12 Ves. 
466; Buckmaster vs. Harross, 13 Ves. 472; Kemmeys vs. Proctor, 3 
Ves. and Bea. 59 ; Emerson vs. Hulis, 2 Taunt. 47.] In the case of 
Coles vs. Trecothick, the sale, although made by an auctioneer, was a pri. 
vate one, and t!)e signing by the clerk as liis agent. In the case before the 
commissioners, the parties are described in the contract, and the names of the 
chiefs are signed as agents for the reservees, and the sale is a public one. 
What distinction can be drawn in the one case, which does not equally 
exist in the other ? And considei-ations of necessity and policy apply, if pos- 
sible, morestiongly to the contract under consideration. Again : tlie stat- 
ute does not make tlie contract void ; it only denies the remedy ; and the 
benefit of its ptovisiotis can only be claimed by the parties who are souglit 
to be chai'^^ed, and tijen only when brought to the special notice of the 
courts. In this case, the parties do not claim the benefit of tlie st;\tute; 
but the advantage is claimed by strangers, unknown to the contract, and 
affected by none of its provisions. It was not in favor of volunteers that 
the statute was intended to oj)eratc. Under this branch of the argument, 
it may be necessary to examine the quantity of estate possessed by the 
reservee; for it is clear that, if he has no interest that can be recognised 
as an alienable estate by the laws of this State, the statute of frauils 
cannot operate on what does not exist. Has the reservee, under the t/ea- 
ty, a disposable estate ? By disposable, we mean a union of the will with 
the act ; which, of itself, is sufficient to pass the interest to another. The 
answer is obvious, that he has not ; because the grantee can take no in- 
terest from him until sanctioned and approved by the Government, in 
whom the fee resides. The United States, seised in fee, grant to the re- 
servee the use, for five years, with the power to alienate, subject to tiieir ap- 
proval. The fee still resides in the Government, and the conveyance by 
the reservee, of itself, passes no title. The title is passed only on the a|)- 
probation of the Government, and is manifested by the issuance of the 
patent, which perfects the title of the purchaser in the manner defined by 
the treaty. Tliat the reserves are public lands, is clear from the fifth ar- 
ticle of the treaty, which is in these words: "All intruders upon the 
country hereby ceded, shall be removed therefrom in the same manner as 
8 



114 [ Doc. No. 274. ] 

intruders may be removed from other public lands, until the country is 
surveyed and the selections niadej excepting, lidwever, from this provi- 
sion, those white persons who have made their own improvements and not 
expelled the Creeks from theirs. Such persons may lemain until their 
crops are gatiiered. After the country is surveyed, and the selections 
made, this article shall not ojjerate on that part of it not included in such 
selections. IJut intruders shall, in the manner bef«)re describe<l. be re- 
m«Aed from these selections for the term i f iUe years from the ratification 
»)f this treaty, or until the same is conveyed to white ])ersons/' Anterior 
to the execution of the treaty, Alabama had extended her jurisdiction over 
the territory subsequently ceded. (See Aik. Dig.) Without inquiring into 
the constitutionality of the laws of Alabama on this sul>ject, it will be 
sullicient to observe that this doctrine has received the assent of her judi- 
ciary. The United States were the owners of the soil, the jurisdiction of 
which belonged to Alabama. Of course, any article of the treaty pro\i- 
ding for the removal of intruders upon lands belonging to the citizens of 
Alabama, or within her jurisdiction, not being public lands, in any other 
way than the one recognis«d by the laws of that State, would be unauthor- 
ized and ilh gal. The intruders upon seh ttions are to be lemoved in the 
sane manner as intruders on other public lands ate renmved, for the term 
of five years, or until the same are con\eyed to while persons. By the 
tteaty, theiefore, the reserves are considei* d as j.-ublic lands. They were 
so co'nsideird by the Secretary of War, in his correspondence with Gov- 
ernor Ga}le, bearing date 5th September, 1833, in which he observes : 
" The other limitation of the treaty is as to the district of country, confi- 
ning the obligation of the Government to remove intruders on the tracts 
located to the Indians after the country is surveyed and the selections 
made. It is obvious, therefore, that the treaty imposes on the Govern- 
ment the dutv of removing intruders from these lands. 1 may add the 
fact, that the whole subject was fully explained to the Cretk chiefs previ- 
ouslv to tlie execution of the treaty, and they were told what were the 
kga'l poweis of the Government upon this subject, and how they would be 
cai ried into effect. They were told by the Tresident, that as the land, 
by the cession, would become the property of the United Stales, all in- 
trudeis may be lemoved, as they may be iemo\ed from other public lands." 
These extracts show that, in the opinion of the Government at that time, 
thev were public lands, and could no more be disposed of by the Iinlian 
who had tiie use of them, without the consent of the United States, than 
anv other portion of the public domain. 

'1 hat the exercise of an authority delegated by parol by the individual 
reseivee to the chiefs, as in this case, has been sanctioned by the Govern- 
ment, the commissioners are referred to the instructions from the War 
Depailnunt to Messrs. Benson, Martin, and Fit/patrick, directing them, 
if possible, to procure a delegation of chiefs to jjrocred to Washington, 
authorized to treat for the sale of the reserves. At the time these instruc- 
tions were given, it is believed that the reserves had not been located; but 
while the whole suijject w'as under the consideration of the Department, 
as well as the action of the commissioners, these selections were made 
and the reserves located : and it was not until some time after the location 
of these reserves, that the project was abandoned ; and then, not for any 
wai.r of authority on llie jiart of the Government to make the j)urcl:ase 
of the delegation, but because the reservees were at that time opposed to 



[ Doc. No. 274. ] 115 

sale. That the undivided interest to these tracts is in the United States, 
receives further confirmation from the opinion of the Aitorney General, 
cited in the first argument ; and the decision of the supreme court of 
Alabama, as to the quantity of interest held by the reservee under the treaty. 

The counter-memorialists, upon this point, urge, first, that thereservees 
have an estate upon condition expressed in the gi-ant ; and, secondly, that 
having this estate, any contract for the sale of it is necessary to be in wri- 
ting, by the statute of frauds. 

If the reservee has an estate upon condition, they err when from these 
premises the conclusion is drawn that the estate is therefore either dispo- 
sable or inheritable. Any estate which has a condition annexed to it, be-- 
comcs an estate upon condition ; and it may be an estate not disposable by 
the tenant, as an estate for years, limited to the person of the grantee, or 
it n)ay be both disposable and inheritable. The fact, if it exist, of the 
reservee having an estate upon condition, proves nothing. The question 
is, Is the estate such as the leservee can, by his own act, dispose of? And 
this question is doubly answered by the treaty, which refers the disposi- 
tion to the President, allowing the reservee not in reality to convey, but 
simply to direct the conveyance. That the Indian may contract for the 
sale of his reserve, is stii)ulate(l by the treaty. The form of tlie contract 
has not been prescribed by that instrument, and is nugatory and void un- 
til approved by the President. Even then, it does not |)ass a perfect right 
to the })urchaser, but only gives to him the right to demand a conveyance 
from them. The engagements of the United States did not give to the 
reservee more than the use of a portion of the lands ceded by the first ar- 
ticle of the treaty, for five years, with the right, at the termination of that 
period, to demand the fee himself, or in the mean time to direct the grant 
of the fee to an approved purchaser from him. The contract to sell, can 
only be considered as directing the United States to convey the title re- 
tained in them to a ])aiticular purchaser; and this direction of title is 
committed to t!ie discretion of the President, and can, sanctioned by him, 
as well be exercised by parol as by the most solemn and technical instru- 
ment. 

It is contended by the memorialists, that the contract under considera- 
tion does not fall within the statute of frauds : First, because the pa- 
rol delegation of authority by the reservees to the chiefs brings the sign- 
ing of the latter within the statute ; Secondly, because, imder the treaty, 
he has not that degree of estate on which the statute can operate; and. 
Lastly : because the present contract presents a peculiar case for the equu 
table consideration of the President, expressly vested in him by the treaty, 
in relation to all contracts for the sale of leseives. whether verbal or- 
written, without refeience to the statute of frauds. 

The memorialists have executed the contract, by the payment of one- 
half of the consideration ; and the Gctvertiment, to whose consideration it 
is committed, have in their own case sanctioned, by their instruction, the 
same course of proceeding which has been adopted in the present in- 
stance. 

It is contended also by the counter-memorialists, that, apart from 
all other considerations, the inadequacy of the price paid by the memori- 
alists is so great as to vitiate the contract ; and authorities have been 
introduced to show the instances on which the courts have either set aside 
contracts on this ground, or refused to entertain bills for specific perform?- 



tie [ Doc. jNo. 274. ] 

ancc. In all the cases cited, tlieie were other circumstances tending to 
show that fraud or iiiipo.sition had heen |iractise«l or attempted by the 
party seeking ilie interpusition of the court; and, on this presumption of 
fraud, rendered conclusive by tlie union of circumstarjces, was the relief 
decreed. 

It is admitted, also* that where tl»c inadequacy is so great, or (in the 
language of the law) so sluHking. as to force the mind to the conclusion 
that no one in the. possessinu oi his senses could thus have bargained 
reliel is granted, not on account of the inadequacy, but because the inad- 
equacy is so great as to be legardcd as conclusive evidence of Iraud. 
\> liere. however, the inade(juacy is not so great as to carry fraud upon its 
face, and is not attended by fraudulent circumstances, it is mit sullit lent. 
(16 Ves. 83 ; Pow. on Contracts ; 2 Har. 14. 16 ; Ves. 517 j 2 John. Rep. 
1 ; 14 Jdin. Rep. 5^27 ; 1 1 John. Rep. 559.) 

The (juestion is (hen reduced to whether ihe sum of seventy-five thou- 
sand d<)llars. tlie coiisidecittion .stipulated in the (untract, is so disj)ortion- 
ate lo liie \ aloe of the lands embraced by the Mist artirlc of that instru- 
ment, (the other lands being taken at valuation.) as to pollute and Nitiate 
the c.oritiaci. One witness swears that tiie wliole number of disputed 
lands are w«)rth two hundred ihousand dollars. Another witness swears 
that some of the tracts were worth, on an aveiage, one thousand dollars. 
The reports of tlie contracts maiked (or reversal are before the commis- 
sioners ; and on reference to those repoits, it will be found that the whole 
number of reser\es, the subject of the contracts marked for- reversal, were 
originally certilicd at the sum of one hundred and for tv -four- thousand dol- 
lars. These certifrcalions include all the lands conveyed by the first article 
of the contract, and were made by the olUcers of the United Stales ap- 
pointed by the President for- that purpose. It is for- the commissioners to 
say whether' the olKcei-s of the treaty, or- these witnt-sses. are correct 
in their- estimates of the \alue. Sirrce these contiacls have been marked 
for iTversal, one hundred ami four have beerr r-e' eriilied on new contracts, 
at the sum of twenty-five thousand thr-ee hun<!red dollars. Estimating the 
whole of the rever-sed tracts in the same jrroportion, tlie value of tlie whole 
number* would be near one hundred and sixty thousand dollai-s. Deduct- 
ing from this amount IIdso tracts which have beerr recer-tified, and al- 
lowing thirty-three anrl a third jrer" c^nt. for- those contr'acls marked for 
reversal which will probably he sustained, (which, it is btlie\e<l. i-a fair 
estimate of the certified value of them,) the remaining contr-acts will not 
amount to (|uite ninety thousand dollar-s. If the valuation of the wilm-sses is 
ad«)pte<l as a basis of caldilation, the tracts are w<nth oire hundred and 
sixteen ihousarul dollars ; and if the original certificatioir of the original 
contracts, they amount to between seventy-nine and eighty thousand rlol- 
lais. If the mean valuation of the three estimates is taki*n, the value of 
the trads exceeds, by a fraction, the sum of ninelvfive thousand dollars. 

In these calcrrlations, it is believed that the allowance made (to- those 
contracts which will be supported, will be fourrd to have been too snrall. 
The courrter--nrerrrorialists have shown rro circumstarrce indicative (d p(»si- 
tive fraud irr the contract ; and w hirlrever- mode of calculation is adopted, 
it is clear- that, rrrider- all the circumstances, the consideration (annot bo 
regarded as iria(hr|iia(e. The tr-ouble, expense, and delay, irr litiga- 
ting or com|)roin!siiig ail (he contracts marked for i-e\ei-sal. ar-c also to 
be cuirsidered. It rr.ay be added, that the coiisidciatiorr was deeoied a 



[ Doc. No. 27 1. ] li7 

fair equivivlent by the officers appointed by the President, and by the chiefs 
selected by the nation. It was so considered by llie certifying agents pre- 
viously ap])oiiitcd by the Government as is shown from their valuation; 
and, as far as the evidence discloses, )t was so considered by those who 
were present ; for, althougli one witness swears that he offeied a greater 
sum for the land, yet (he same witness, from his own evidence, was pres- 
ent when the parties were negotiating the terms of the contract, and did 
not rej)eat the offer. What is the presumption ? He believed, according to 
his own statement, that the lands were worth a much greater amount ; and 
with the full knowledge tiiat they were about to be disposed of fur the con- 
sideration stated in the conti-act, he stands by, permitting the sale to go 
on, without repeating the offer (previously made by him) to the agents of 
Government, whose duty would have required them, if he had either the will 
or the ability to pay the price, to accept it. There is but one conclusion: 
either that he was in reality unable to pay the amount, or that, on consider- 
ation, he had declined doing so. Or, perhaps, in making the offer he had ex- 
ceeded his authoiity. The testimony as to the declarations of Jim Boy is 
illegal — being derived through the medium of Indian and negro interpre- 
ters, who are, by the laws of Alabama, incompetent witnesses. (See Aik. 
Digest.) If their oaths cannot be admitted, a fortiori their statements 
cannot. Independent of these ol)jections, circumstances show that these 
statements, if made by that chief, were untrue, and made thr«)ugh motives 
of policy, to preserve terms with the whites, by whom he was surrounded. 
(See testimony of General Woodward.) It is also in evidence that Jim 
Boy understands sonjething of the English language. That the negotia- 
tion was conducted publicly, and explained at the time, is proved not only 
by the witnesses sworn, but by the statements of Colonel Campbell and Cap- 
tain Page ; and the same chief is found receiving his proportion of the 
purchase money. 

By the third article of the contract, it is provided '< that the money here- 
inaftei' sti[)ulated to be paid, shall be paid totlie Indian entitled to the land, 
in the presence of the chief and an officer of the United States." And it 
is charged that the payments have not been made in the manner required 
by this article, and tliat, therefore, the memorialists are entitled to no 
benefit of the contract. By the last article of the same instrument, 
seventy-five thousand dollars is to be paid by the memorialists — one half 
upon tlie sealing of the contract, to the agent of the United States who 
shall be appointed to receive the same ; and the balance in four uionths, at 
Fort Gibson. The third article applies only to the United States and the 
reservees, and regulates the terms of payment to them, and does not apply 
to the memorialists ; and if the payment is made by them in the manner 
stipulated by the last article of the contract, and thus placed beyond their 
control, no reason can be assigned why they should be held responsible, 
on account of any alteration between the United States and the reservee. 
That this j)ayment has been made to the agent of the United States ap- 
pointed to receive it, in the exact mode in which by the contract they stip- 
ulated, appears from the receipt of Captain Page, endorsed upon the con- 
tract. The reasons, as well as the necessity of the alteration of the nn)de 
of payment from the Government agent to the Indian, is fully explained 
in the communication of Colonel Campbell ; and by the testimony of the 
witness, Ta>lor, it is established that the reservees of one town received 
their proportion of the purchase-money. That the number of the reservees 



118 [ Doc. No. 274. ] 

who were paid docs not correspond with the number of contracts marked 
for reversal, in tlic town to which tliis pavment was made, is properly 
referrihie to tlie other payment, wliicli was shortly to he made ; oi-, that 
those claims only are ronsidered as Iraudulent by the Itidiai>, in which the 
reservee was jjcisonated, and not those contracts which have been marked 
for reversal on other or merely lormal grounds. However it may be, it 
i^ould be dillicult to conceive how the terms oC the conti-act on the part of 
the memorialists could have been more fully complied with ; and equally 
difficult to assign any leason why their rights should be aftected by an 
alteration in the teinis of the contract, made without their consent, oi- even 
by the neglect of those rej)resenting tlie United States in com|)l>ing with 
their stij)ulations. That the contract was altered by the L nited States 
and the Indian, as to the mode of payment fiom the agent of Govern- 
ment, is admitted ; and equally certain is it, as stated by Colonel Camp- 
bell, that circumstances rendered it absolutely necessary that a different 
mode of pa}ment should be adopted. This was done for the security of 
the Indians, was a matter of arrangeme»it between tliem and the United 
States, and was neither suggested nor recommended by the mimorialists. 

By the article of the contract is secured to the leservee the right 

to dissent before he receives the payment in the mar.nei- stipidated in that 
article. This was intended as a farther security for the rights of the res- 
ervee, if he should either be dissatisfied witii the provisions of the contract, 
or be able to make a more favorable disposition of his reserve. If, by the 
accejjtance of his pioportion of the consideration, lie received a benefit 
under the contract, his assent was rightly to be presumed ; and if he dissent- 
ed, equal justice required a proportionate deduction to be made Irom the 
purchase-money. The same equity and good faith are apparent in every 
provision of the contract — the interests of the Indian jealously and faith- 
fully protected, and the rights of bona fide purchasers in all cases respected. 
The motives which induced the execution of the contract have been sus- 
pected ; and the memorialists must be permitted to expr'ess their- surprise 
that the validity of the contract is impeached, and its equities impugned, 
only by those who claim to occupy the situation of bona hue purchasei's. 
As claims of this character are specially protected by the contract, they 
are at a loss to conceive how the rights of those individuals can be aftected. 
Some explanation may possibly be found in that article of the contract 
which, by its oj)eration, substitutes, in the place of the Indian, parties 
more competent to defend their- rights, and better qualified to unra>el the 
web of fraud in which many of the contracts marked for reversal ar-e 
enveloped. 

Irr conclusion, we have only to repeat, that in the opinion of the memo- 
rialists the contract is in agreement with the j)rovisions of the tr-eaty. 
It has been publicly executed and publicly acknowledged. It has received 
the sanction of one of the highest officers of the Government, given with the 
full knowledge of all the circumstances. The par ties are not dissatisfied, 
and are not (bund complaining. It has been executed b}' the payment of a 
|)ortion of the consideration; some benefit has resulted to the United States 
from theexecution, and great injury must ensue to the memorialists, w ithout 
its ratification. 

GEORGE GOLDTinVAITE, 

Counsel for inemoiialisfs. 



[Doc. No. 274.] 119 

Washington city, January 5, 1837. 
Sir: On account of the indisposition of the President, together with 
your constant business engagements, to avoid the time and trouble which 
a personal explanation of my business might impose, 1 have thougiit pro- 
per to address the enclosed comuiunicatioH upon the subject to the Presi- 
dent, which 1 must request the favor of you Xsaxamint, and have present- 
ed to him for his consideration. 

Very respectfully, your obedient servant, 

J. C. WATSON. 
Hon. B. F. Butler, 

Secretary of War. 



Washington city, January 5, 1837. 

Sir: The deep interest which I feel in the fate of the contraoi made be- 
tween mj-self and otiiers, with certain Indians of the Creek tribe, in rela- 
tion to the contested claims in McHenry's district, will, I trust, be a suffi- 
cient apology for the trouble which this letter will give -to the Presidt-nt. 
There are some facts and considerations connected with this contract 
whicii may not have been developed by the testimony taken by the com- 
missioners, Messrs Balch and Crawford, to whom it was referred, and 
which the undersigned begs leave to submit as briefly as possible. 

This contract was not sought for by me, or those concerned with me. 
Whilst at Tallassee, in the Creek country, attending exclusively to the 
business of emigration, (being one of the cotitractors for the removal of the 
Creeks,) I was called upon by Col. Campbell, as the authorized agent of 
General Jesup, and received from him the proposition to enter ir»to tlie 
contract for the contested business of these Indians. Being satisfied by 
assurances then given from General Jesup that the authority to make the 
contract proposed was ample upon the part of the officers of the Govern- 
ment, and tiiat the President would undoubtedly approve it, I acceded 
to the terms proposed by General Jesup, and which were, as I understood, 
recommended by all the Government officers present, and the contract 
was closed. Tlie authority I could not doubt, when it was readily pro- 
posed by General Jesup to make the Government a party to it. 

At the time it was entered into, there were several thousand white per- 
sons present or in the immediate vicinity, (citizens and troops,) and the ne- 
gotiations were of public notoriety. It is not believed that tliere was any 
other person or company of persons having either the ability oi* willing- 
ness to enter into such a contract ; and this opinion is sustained by the ev- 
idence of Captain Page, who was present throughout the whole transaction, 
and took an active part as an officer and agent of Government. 

It having been understood amongst the Indians generally that some dis- 
position was about to be made of their contested claims before their depart- 
ure west, a very large assemblage of them took place at Tallassee upon 
the occasion, for the purpose of arranging this vexHtious subject, and trans- 
acting other business preparatory to theii' emigratioJi. Almost all the al- 
leged frauds had been committed in McIIenry's district j and Tallassee 
being a central point, it is believed that almost ever)' Indian interested in 
those claims was present upon the occasion alluded to. It is stated by 
Captain Page that tliere were from three to four thousand Indians present, 



120 [ Doc. No. 274. ] 

and that they attended personally to tlie settlement of this business ; that 
they were clamoroi's for its adjustment, iiml uigcd their unwillingness to 
go west until their business was settled ; tliat the nature and terms of the 
contia("t were fully explained both to the common Indians and chiefs, 
before it was consummated, and that the cunuion Indiaus, as woll as chiefs, 
were called upon to njake known theirobjfctioiis, if any, and were assured 
that all jieisons dissenting should be excluded Irom its operations ; that 
no dissent was signified, but that all consented to its execution ; that 
the money was jjaid at the public council-square, in [>resence of all the 
Indians assembled, and that he considered it the best possible arrangement 
uhich could iiavc been made for the interest of the Indians as well as the 
countr} . The undersigned respectfully presents to the consideration of the 
President, whether the foiins and mode usually pursued in the ti-ansaction 
of business with Indians were not in this case particularly ol)served ; and 
whetlier, in every point of view, the facts do not warrajitthe conclusion that 
the chiefs who signed ihe contract were authorized to do so by all concern- 
ed : and tllat each individual interested, or at least nearly all, understood, 
approved, and authorized the execution of the contract. 

If I am rightly inlormed, the Government of the United States has never 
been very |)aiticula!' in its trans.iction of business with Indians, and has 
seldom (ibseived the strict and technical rules of law in arranging con- 
tracts with them. It would seem to the undersigned, that if the individ- 
ual Indians, wliose lights were involved, were upon this occasion made 
fully acquainted with the nature and extent of the contract proposed, and 
that the forms usual and universal in theii- business transactions were ob- 
served, the stricter forms of our own laws would not be considered essen- 
tial, and that the contract thus made would be held valid. 

It is attested by Mr. Taylor, that at least one town of Iiidians actually 
received their |)oition of the money paid, and that the sums weie paid to 
the individual Indians in person ; and Colonel Campbell testifies that it 
was the advice of General Jesup, and adopted by the persons inteiested, 
for the nnmey to be paid into the hands of the chiefs, to be held by them 
in tru'it for the individual Indians, and to be paid out to them at some con- 
venient point, beyond the reach of their numerous pretended creditors. 
The undersigned liegs h^ave to call the attention of the President particu- 
larly to the testiniony of Colonel Campbell, Captain I'age, and Mi-. Tay- 
lor, taken by the commissioners, Messrs. Balch and Craw ford ; also to 
the evidence of General Woodward, in relation to Jim Bov's Indians, and 
the value of their lands. 

Whether the sum jjaid by the parties to this contract was a fair equiv- 
alent for the inteiest or claim embraced in it, is not a (juestion for the 
judgnjcnt of the undersigned ; but when it is recollected that all those 
lands had been certified to, and sold agreeably to the juovisions of the 
treaty and regulations of the War Department, and their recovery (un- 
ceitairi at best) could only be obtained at great risk, expense, vexation, 
and truuble, and that all this was to be encountered by the purchasers, 
an obligation also to take all their unsold lands at a fair valuation — it can 
scarcely be doubted that the amount agreed to be paid was just and fair. 
Besides, there wei-e many intelligent white Indian countrymen present, 
who understood the country, and were able to determine upon a proper es- 
timate. The Indi.iiH were satisfied with it, and it was more than could 
have been obtained frtnu any other quarter. 



I 



[ Doc. No. 274. ] 121 

The undersigned unhesitatingly expresses the belief that, if this contract 
is disapproved by the President, a very large majority of the lands in 
question will fall inevitably into the hands of those who have obtained 
their certification, against whom the most glaring frauds have been al- 
leged. The Iddians have gone to the West, far from the scene of these 
transactions ; they liave neither the power nor capacity to prosecute in- 
quiries into them ; and, unaided by those whose interests would ensure a 
spirited and successful investigation, they would sievir be able to strip 
those frauds of the veil with wiiich they have been enveloped. The Pres- 
ident must in the end approve those fraudulent contracts, made in defiance 
of every principle of humanity and justice ; or their reversal must take 
place, amidst the most harassing and embarrassing obstacles, as endless 
in their duration as they will be vexatious to the Government and inju- 
rious to the country. On the other hand, should the contract be approved, 
the undersigned confidently believes tliat he would have it in his power 
to put a speedy termination to this embarrassing subject, either by favor- 
able compromises with the speculators themselves, or by the most trium- 
phant and speedy exposure of their unjust and unfair proceedings. Such 
an issue would bring peace and quiet to the country in wiiich those lands 
are situated, and produce a speedy settlement of it by an enterprising pop- 
ulation, now kept aloof by the uncertainty and confusion in which the land 
titles are involved. The undersigned asserts (what is, perhaps, unknown 
to the President, but what is strictly true) that the opposition to the ap- 
proval of this contract springs solely from interested white men, and is 
confined exclusively to those who have had their portion of the odium and 
imputation of fraudulent speculators, whose opposition could have been 
avoided, and their support to the contract obtained, by accepting their 
propositions, frequently made, for the settlement of their business in a par- 
ticular way. The Indians do not complain ; and it is well known that the 
people of Georgia and Alabama near the scene, and interested in the ear- 
ly settlement of the country, are decidedly favorable to the approval of 
the contract ; 1 believe I might say there would not be found a dissenting 
voice, beyond those interested in the alleged frauds. Why, therefore, are 
objections made, protests filed, and arguments made against it ? By one 
of the stipulations of the contract, all bona fide contracts made with the 
individual Indians before its consummation, are protected, and are to be 
allowed and confirmed. Bona fide purchasers cannot be affected ; it is 
therefore difficult to understand the object and extent of the objections 
made to this contract, but by supposing they came from other than bona 
Jide purchasers, and are intended to advance the interest of a few fraudulent 
speculators, who seek, by overthrowing this contract, and thrusting aside 
those interested in it, to carry out and consummate their unholy specula- 
tions upon the ignorant savage. 

The undersigned cannot permit himself to suppose that any course will 
be adopted by the President of the United States, calculated to benefit 
this class alone, at the expense of the Indian, and the parties to this con- 
tract, who have paid a fair consideration, and who have acted openly, and 
were drawn into it at the instance and upon ti>e faith of high officers of 
the Government, acting with alleged authority from the President or 
Secretary of War. 

The undersigi»ed states that the last instalment, ^37,500, will become 
due in a few days, and, by agreement, is to be paid into the hands of a 



1522 [ Doc. No. 274. ] 

Oovernment agent, and by him to be paid to the Indians. If the contract 
be approved, tliis latter stun might be distributed by the agent to the 
individual Indians having claims upon it, and wliose names and identity 
may be ascertained by reference to the books of the certifying and investi- 
gating agents : and if ar)y inecjiiality should be discovered in the first distri- 
bution, it can be provided for in this, and ccjualizcd by the agent. 

The undersigned does not hesitate to believe that almost evei-y Indian 
N\hose (laim has been purchased in this contract, would be willing to re- 
ceive at once his portion of that fund — thus recognising the validity of the 
contract ; and the undeisigned resj)ectfully suggests that the distribution 
of this fund might be made so as to ensure to each Indian intei-ested a just 
and ecjuitable portion for his land. If such an end can be accomj)lished, 
the undeisigned does not perceive that any stipulation of the tieaty by 
which those lands have been resei'ved would be infringed : whilst substatitial 
justice will be done to the Indians, and all dilliculties in the settlement and 
termination of unpleasa»it and troublesome litigations be obviated, 

Ihe uiideisigned, in conclusion, would respectfully suggest to the Presi- 
dent the embarrassing situation of the jjai-ties to this contract. They have 
been induced to enter into it by the representations of the public func- 
tionaries. It tended largely, if not mainly, to promote the interests and 
facilitate the objects of Government, in the removal ol the Indians, as well 
as supplying the warriors for Florida. They have paid out a large sum of 
money, which t.'iey cannot hope to recover back from the Indians, (having 
relied solely upon the validity and approval of the contract,) and are under 
written obligations to j)ay another heavy sum in a veiy few days. If the 
contract be disaflirmed, the only prospect for remuneration seems to be a 
resort to Congress j a very uncertain one, at best, and certainly tedious, 
expensive, and vexatious. 

I'he undeisigned could not hope to obtain the action of the present Con- 
gress u|)on the subject; and delay for another year would be a serious and 
heavy loss, and a matter of great inconvenience to all concerned. The 
undeisigned has, therefore, to request of the I'resident an early consideration 
of tlie subject ; and hopes that enough will be found in tiie circumstances 
of the case to authorize a favorable decision. 

With great respect, your most obedient servant, 

J. C. WATSON. 

The President of the United States. 



Washington city, December 21, 1836. 

Sir: Enclosed I hand jou the receij)t of Captain Page, which I beg may 
be received and considered as part of the evidence in favor of the contract 
to which it refers. 

It w ill be seen by this receipt, that the agents of Government took upon 
themselves the j)roper distribution of the money under the said contract ; 
and I will here take the opportunity to state, that the contract was arranged 
exclusively with the Government agents ; that I never had, directly or 
indirectly, any thing to do with an Indian upon the subject. The propo- 
sition came to me from General Jesup, by Colonel Campbell, his authorized 



[ Doc. No. 274. J 123 

agent; and assurances given at the same time that I might rely upon the 
approval of whatever he might do, as he should not go hcyond his authority. 
The consideration in the contract was also fixed by the Indians and the 
agents of Government. 

With great respect your obedient servant, 

J. C. WATSON. 
Hon. B. F. Butler, 

Acting Secretary of War. 



Copy of the receipt mentioned in the foregoing tetter. 

Received from James C. Watson, Wm. Walker, Edward Hanrick, 
Peter C. Harris, and John Peabody, thirty-seven thousand five hundied 
dollars, in compliance with the third article of a contract entered into be- 
tween the United States and certain individuals of the Creek tribe of Indi- 
ans holding disputed claims to reserves, which is to be retained by me until 
the assent of said people is given to said contract, and a person designated 
to receive it on their behalf. 

JOHN PAGE, 
Capt. Superintendent Creeks. 

August 29, 1836. 



Washington city, January £4, ISSr. 

Sir: I submit to your consideration the following plan for the disposi- 
tion of the contract now under your advisement. 

ist. That the contract be approved, conditionally — allowing the purcha- 
sers or contractors an opportunity of arranging with the holders of certi- 
fied contracts, so that in all cases in which the consent both of the company 
and the holders of the certified contracts, or, in other words, the individual 
(ostensible) purchasers, shall be obtained, the certified contracts shall be 
approved by the President as they now stand. 

This plan would settle a large majority of the cases, and preserve a strict 
compliance with the treaty and the regulations. 

£d. That a certain time be allowed the company to obtain the consent 
or approval of the individual Indians, (reservees,)and that for that purpose 
an agent be appointed by the President, at the expense of the company, to 
go west, and take such consent in writing. 

3d. That in cases where the consent of the reservees cannot be obtained, 
either from death or other causes, the land shall be sold at public auction, 
at the risk of the purchaser, and the proceeds be divided between the In- 
dians and the company ; the company to have an amount proportioned to 
the sum supposed to have been received by the Indian out of the S37,500 
already paid by the company. 

4th. That the agent to be appointed shall be furnished with an abstract 
of the contested cases, showing the names, residences, and other evidences 
of identity of the real reservees; that he obtain, from the best information 
in his power, a knowledge of the comparative value of each reservation; 
and that in all cases where the Indians ratify this contract, the remaining 
837,500 shall be paid by the agent to each reservee, in proportion to the 
value of his land. 



124 [ Doc. No. 274. ] 

5tli. That in all cases where the consent or approbation of the Indian be 
obtained, and no aii-angeinent has or can he etTectcd wilh thooiiginal indi- 
vidual purchasei, the company shall be allowed an op|)()rtunity of setting 
aside the certified contract, in the mode pointid out in the contract made at 
Tallasscc ; and when set aside, then a patent to issue to the company for the 
land. 

In rondnsion, I wctuld respectfully suggest that the undeisigued would 
be willing to throw aiound the a])|»roval of the contract any other addi- 
tional guards which may be thought niccssaiy to comply with the treaty, 
and do substantial Justice to the Indians. 

1 am, very resj)ectfully, your obedient servant, 

J. C. WATSON. 
Hon. B. F. Butler, 

Secretary of War. 



January 24. 

If the mind of the Secretary of War is inclined against ihe approval of 
General Watson's contract, I have to rcf|ucst that tlie drcision be susjjend- 
ed until Genei-al Watson can have an opportunity of submitting a prop- 
osition, embracing a jdnn which may possibly obviate objections to its ap- 
proval. 

General Watson will submit it, whenever the Secretary will be pleased 
to receive it ; and should feel obliged lor the opportunity before the case 
is submitted finally to the President. 

Respectfully, &c. 

A. IVERSON. 
Hon. B. F. Butler, 

Secretary of War. 



House of Representatives, 

February 9, 1837. 

Sir : Enclosed is a letter received this morning, which I wish you to 
give that consideration which is due to a highly respectable citizen. It 
is the second letter I have received on the subject : the first contained a 
general exj)ressioji of opinion in favor of the claim; but as I knew the claim 
to be well represented here, I did not send that letter to the Department, 
or think that any thing on my part was necessary to be done. 

If a decision on this subject has not bern made, I think, from the letter I 
send you, it will be perceived that there are large interests involved on 
both sides, and that no «letermination should take j)lace until the objec- 
tions adverse to the claim, as well as the arguments in favor of it, should 
be fully heard. 

1 have no information whatever as to the fairness or unfairness of the 
claim ; but as it appears by Mr. Bryan's letter there are large conflicting 
interests, not merely among the Indians, but amtjng the citizens of Alaba- 
ma and (icorgia, I have no doubt the propriety of great caution in de- 
ciding this question will be perceived. 



I 



[ Doc. No. 274. ] 125 

Will you have the kindness to inform me what decision has been had 
on this claim, or what will likely be done with it ? 

Your obedient servant, 

DIXON H. LEWIS. 

The SUPEKINTENDENT OF InDIAN AfFAIRS. 



House of Representatives, 

February 25, 1837. 
Mr. C. A. Harris, Commissioner, <^c., 

Will please be so good as to send me a copy of the conti-act entered into 
between General Jesup and Mr. Watson and others ; also the confirma- 
tion of said contract by the President. In doing this as soon as possible, 
you will greatly oblige your obedient servant, 

DIXON H. LEWIS. 

P. S. Please answer, by return of the messenger, at what time the copy 
can be forwarded, as I am anxious to see it as soon as possible. 



Columbus, Georgia, Jlpril 21, 1837. 
Sir; Your letter of the 5th instant, addressed to the commissioners, 
infoi-ming them that you had transmitted by mail '« a copy of Colonel 
Hogan's report of his investigation in McHenry's district, prej)ared for 
Captain Page," reached me on the 16th. The copy referred to, however, 
did not reach Tuskegee until the I8th. 

According to the instructions contained in your letter to the commis» 
sioners, I compared it with the copy in my possession, and, after doing so, 
transmitted it by mail to Captain Page, at Little Rock, under cover of 
the frank of your office, covering the co\)y sent. 

As I had reason to believe that Captain Page was at Mobile, anxious 
to receive this document, I addressed him a letter to that place, informing 
him of the course I had taken. I also addressed to him at Little Rock to 
the same effect, 
lam, sir, very respectfully, your obedient servant, 

JOHN M. WYSE. 
To D. Kurtz, Esq. 

Mtinsr Commissioner. 



Office of Commissioners to investigate alleged frauds^ &c. 

Washington, June 17, 1837. 
Sir : In your communication of 17th February last to this board, will 
be found the following instruction : " In the further progress of your 
investigations, it is the opinion of the President that you should devolve 
the burden of proof on the first purchaser; this will exclude, of course, 
all examination of cases in which a tract has been resold, but not re- 



126 r I^oc. No. 274. J 

certified after reversal, and in which it may have been resold and recer- 
tifiiMl without autliority on the part of the agent." 

Disposed to cany out and follow instructions, it has appeared to us, in 
considering our extensive class of cases, that if the above directions are 
pursued strictly, and according to their natural import, they will have an 
effect not inttiidcd. The contract with (ieneral Watson and others, of 
28th August last, j)rovide3 "that the tiilc hereby obtained, or which may 
be obtained, in pursuance of this conti-act, shall not interfere with the 
rights of any individual who has made a prior valid contract with the 
rightful claimant of said land, (whether the same has been certified or 
not) or any part thereof; but the respective claims (if necessai'y for set- 
tlement) shall be investigated," \c. If the contracts which have not been 
recertified are to be thrown aside by us, it is obvious that the contract of 
28th August will cover much more ground than was contemjdated by the 
parties to it, and will give to the purchasers lands which they did not 
purchase. 

We will thank you to say whether the instruction was intended to 
operate to the full extent of which it is capable ; or how far. According to 
the views of the War Department, it ought to influence our determina- 
tions. 

Very respectfullv, your most obedient servants, 

T. HARTLEY CRAWFORD, 
ALFRED BALCH, 

Commissioners* 

C. A. Harris, Esq. 

Commissioner of Indian Jffairs. 



Mobile Poist, Mahama, July 4, 1837. 

Sir: I have the honor to acknow ledge the receipt of your letter of 20th of 
last month. Immediately on my arrival at this place, I commenced on the 
land business. I brought on with me to this place about one hundred and 
eighty warriors: a large number of them belong to Jim Boj's town. The 
second payment I have received from the company. I called on Jim Boy for 
the piopoi'tion of the fiist payment which was in liis hands; he jiroduced it. 
I added to it his propoition of the second payment. I have paid all of his 
town, except fifteen — ten of whom are in Florida that did not come on with 
me, five are dead, three killed in battle against the Seminoles, and two died 
of sickness. The widows of these deceased Indians catne forward to re- 
ceive the amount due their deceased husbands : I have stated to them I could 
not pay it over to them until 1 had communicated with you o;i the subject, 
though I considered it as so much money deposited in my hands for safe- 
keeping. These widows have large families, and stand very much in need 
of the money ; and seeing all the others receive their money, it was diflicult 
forme to convince them of the ])ropriety of deferring the case before they 
could receive it. To gratify thcni, I deposited the aniount in Jim Boj'.s 
(their chief's) hands until I had communicated w ith you on the subject. I 
w\\\ thank you to instruct me on this subject. 

I have got tlwough with upwards of one hundred claims. Ldoubt if there 
will be any necessity of my going to Arkansas, tivitil the balance of the 
warriors return from Florida, when I can close up every thing here, and 



[ Doc. No. 274. J 12T 

accompany them. If the land company think it advisable, I will go; but I 
do not see iiow the business can be finally closed until the warriors, now in 
Florida, return. 

With respect, I have the honor to be, your obedient servant, 

JOHN PAGE, 
Captain and Disbursing Agent Emigration. 
To C. A. Harris, Esq. 

Commissioner of Indian Affairs, Washington City. 



Washingtov city, JlugustZ, 1837. 

Sir: Since the execution of the contract made between James C.Watson 
& Co., and certain Ci'eek chiefs, for the lands in McHenrj's district, com- 
monly called t!ie '« contested cases," it has been ascertained that several 
of the individual rtservees have died, and their heirs have applied for the 
money arising from the contract. 

I am instructed by James C. Watson & Co. to present this subject to 
the Department, and lo say tliat they are willing to pay over to the legal 
heirs of all such Indians the just proportion of the consideration money, 
and receive the confirmation of such heirs of the contract aforesaid, pro- 
vided the ratification of the heirs shall be considered of equal validity with 
that of the deceased reservee, and confer upon the purchasers under said 
contract the same right. 

I have to request that instructions be given to Captain Page upon this 
subject. Respectfully, &c. 

A. IVERSON. 

C. A. Haruis, Esq, 

Commissioner of Indian Affairs. 



Washington city, September 4, 1837. 

Sir : We have the honor to enclose, herewith, an extract of a letter da- 
ted the 19th ultimo, from Mr. Carlisle, of Alabama, in relation to a pur- 
chase made by Mr. William Lyle, of tiie claim of Cliisa Hargo, to the 
north half of section 31, township 21, range 22, in the Tallapoosa land 
district, and beg leave to rcque(>t that we may he apprized if there are 
any objections, known to your office, to the recognition of that sale; and 
if so, that we may be informed of their nature, in ordirthat we may pro- 
cure such evidence as the claimant may be able to adduce in support of his 
rights; and that no decision may be had adverse to the interest of Mr. 
Lyle, until that evidence is produced. 

We are, very respectfully, sir, your obedient servants, 

KING & WILSON, .^^en^s. 

Hon. C. A. Harris, 

Commissioner of Indian Jffairs. 



Extract of a letter from W. TV. Carlisle, of Fredonia, Alabama. 
Fredonia, Chambers County, Alabama, 

August 19, 1837. 
"It is a claim of an Indian location, which is in a train of investigation 
before Crawford & Balch, Esquires, commissioners, &c., for the north 



128 [ Doc. No. 274. ] 

half of Hoction 31, townsliip 21, and range 22, Tallapoosa land district, 
located tu Cliisa Ilargo, an Indian. Tite land wa.s first stolen, and can 
be clearly and i\\\\\ pioven, and lias been, befoie Dr. McHenry, while he 
was recertifying Uie stolen contracts; after whicii, u|)on the assui'ance of 
the agent that the land was bona tide tlie property o( tlie Indian, and sub- 
ject to be bought, a very honest planter bought it all for the sum of ^ 1,000 
cash, fi'oni said Indian, and took a warranty deed a short time bchtre his 
emigiation. Subsequently, it seems, a sweeping contract was made with 
the chiffs for all the land thus stolen. Mow you have the outlines and 
features of the claim, which can be more fully set out hereafter, if you 
should believe it a case that can be reached before the executive depart- 
ment, or before Congress. A Mr. AVilliam Lyle is the claimant. The 
Indian deed is in the hands of those commissioners." 



Washington city, October 9, 1837. 
Sir : In the short inteiview v\hich I had the honor to have with you 
this morning, in company of the honorable Mr. King, of the ScHate. and 
Mr. Lewis, of the House of Representatives, upon the subject of Creek In- 
dian reservations, you desire that the matter might be submitted to wri- 
ting, in order that it might be fully and fairly brought before you, for 
your consideration. In obedience to that lequest, I proceed to lay the 
case befoie you in as succinct a manner as is consistent with the riglits of 
the individuals whom I represent. It is known to yon, sir, tliat as earl^ 
as March, 1835, representations were made to the War Department, by 
Doctoi- McIIeni'y, the certifying agent, that gross fiauds had been prac- 
tised in the purcl)ase of Creek Indian i-eservations by various individuals, 
by means of personating one Indian for- another'. Communications were 
also made, containing the same charges, by Opothe \oholo, and otiier 
chiefs of the Creek tribe. Upon the leceipt of these communications. Dr. 
McHenry was ordered to suspend his certifying, and institute an iiic|uir'y 
into the alleged fiauds. In the month of June following, Dr. McHeniy 
proceeded to the investigation ; and after going tlirough most of the towns 
in his district, Colonel Hogan was ap|)ointed to investigate. It may be 
proper here to state, that Dr*. McHenry, in a communication made to the 
AVar Department during his investigation, states that at least nineteen 
out of twenty cases declared fraudulent by him were given up by the pur- 
chasers ; or that they did n(»t attend to prosecute their- claims after notice, 
and so were considered by him as relinquishing their- right. Dr. Mc 
Henry, acting under a letter of the 1 8th June, 1835,* addressed to liim by 
Judge Herring, gave notice to pur-chasers that he was authorized to r-e- 
cer-tily any contract which has been declared fraudulent, provided the 
then holder of the land was brougiit befoi-c him, and ideniilied by t!ie chiefs. 
And in this manner- about two hundred conliacts were lecertified — all of 
them, too, cer-tified in the presence of the chiefs , who identified the Indians, 
nm\ in the public s<juare. Dr-. McHenry continued to certify contracts of 
this descr-iplion, until a rumor got afloat that he was acting without au- 
thority ; he tliei-efore suspended certif} iiig, and addr-essed a letter to the 

* Vide Document 276, 1st session, 24th Congress, p 38. 



[ Doc. IS^o. 274. ] 129 

War Department, iJiforming them of the construction wIjIcIi he hail put 
upon {lie letter of Judi^e Herriiig of the 18th June, and stating tlie fact, 
explicitly, that he had recertifie<l a large nunjher (»f contracts. In an- 
swer to this letter, Judge Herring writes to Dr. McHenry : " It was not 
intended hy my letter of the 18th June thatyou should recertify contracts, 
&c. ; hut inasmucli as you considered that it gave you this authoj'ity, you 
will suhniit these recertified conti-acts to the investigation of Colonel Ho- 
gan," &c. In obedience to these instructions, the recertified contracts 
were submitted to Colonel liogan, and his i-ejiort sustained them all as 
Juir, hanesl, and bonajide contracts, with ime solitary exception, as vvill be 
found by reference to an abstract of his report. Tiie repoi't of Colonel 
Hogan not having been nia<le in exact conformity to his instructions, and 
at tiie reijucst of a portion of the Gforgia delegation in Congress, Messi's. 
Burney and Anderson wei-e associated with Colonel Hogan, and they 
were directed to go through tlie investigation again. They commenced in 
Judge Tarrant's district ; and as they were about to jiroceed in Dr. Mc 
Henry's district, the war broke out, and the investigation before them 
was not carried further. It is to this class of cases, i-eceitilied by Dr. Mc 
Henry, and i-ejjorted upon favorably by Colonel Hogan, to which I wish at 
this time particulaily to direct your attention. General Jesuj), who was 
charged v\ith the management of the war against the Creek Indians, was 
also instructed on the subject of the sale of Creek reseivatiims. The manner 
in which tlie resei-vatiuns weie to be disposed of, was plainly defined in the 
itistrnctions of tlie Secretary of War to General Jesuj), and no discretionary 
])uwer as to the disposition of them was given. I'hese instructions will be 
found in a letter from Captain Page to tiie Secretary of War, dated May 
8, 1836, p. 334, doc. No. 276, 24th Congress, 1st session. A coj)y of these 
instructions was published in the newspaj>ers some time in July or August 
of the sauje year, by Gener-al Jesup, for the information of all concerned ; 
and many puicliases wcr-e made in good faith from the indivi<lual Indians, 
by settlers and otliej* jjersons, under the full belief and confident expecta- 
ti<jn that the policy of the Government would he carried out in good faith, 
and that the instructions so given to General Jesuj), and [)ubli.shed by him, 
were rmt intended to entrap those w ho were disposed to act honestly and 
fairly in their purchases. In |)Ui'suance of these instructions. Major Ab- 
bott, who was the certifying agent, together with Lieutenant Chambers, 
were authorized by Genei-al Jesup to certify contracts standing open 
ujion the books, and such othei* contracts contained on Hogan's at)stract 
as tlie first purchaser would relinquish in writing. They were also in- 
structed to require the production of the Indian who })ersonated and 
jiassed the claim. 'Wiiilst these agents wei-e in the discharge of their 
duty, a contract was made by James C. Watson and others, with Opothe 
Yoholo and others, a jiortion of the chiefs of the Creek tribe of Indians, 
by which the chiefs aforesaid conveyed, for the sum of seventy-five 
thousand dollars, to the said Watson and others, <'a!l the tracts and 
jiarcels of lands situate, lying, and being in that part of the territory 
ceded in the treaty aforesaid, c(Mnprised within the district of lands of which 
R. W. McHenry was the certifying agent, which has formed the subject of 
contest before the agents of the United States, and which have either been 
certified and marked for reversal, or which have been sold and certified 
without authority of the agent of the United Stales to witness said sale 
and certify said contracts ; the saiue being the cases contained in the reports 
9 



130 [ Doc. No. 274. J 

(»f the investigating agents ; subject, however, to the I'estrictions imposed." 
^c. , as fnHows : •' Fifst, that the title hereby obtained, or which may be 
obtained in j)ursuance of this contract, sliall not iiitert'er'C witli the riglits 
of any individual who has made i\ fair vdlid contract with \\\c ri.zliffiti 
cldiiiKint \t> said land, whether the stimc hns been certified or not, or nmj jutrt 
thereof,'* Sir. 'I'his cintiact, having hfen san(ti(u!e<l by General Jesuj). was 
transmitted to Wasiiitigton, and was afterwards submitted to Messrs. Ci'aw- 
ford and Balch,cominissionei's. who, after hearing the testimony in sup|)(>rtof 
and against the contract, reported the same as being contrary to the treaty, 
and C')nse(|uently invalid : it was, however", sanctimied by Genei-al Jack- 
son, the I'residt-nt of the United States. Entertaining tlie opinion that 
the decision of tlie President could not extend the ctnitract beyond the 
words contained in the contract itself, purchaser's holiliiig under- recer-ti- 
fied deeds pr-rtcciMh-d to file memor-ials befor'C the c<nnrnissioner"s. in (U'der" 
to prove the fair-ness of tiieir- contracts ; but they ar'c now stopped liy in- 
structions purporting to be signed by Mr*. Harris, Commissioner- of Indiarr 
Affairs, and sanctioned by yoir ; whicii instrrictions, addressed to the corrr- 
inissioiM'rs, contain this clause: '•That their iiKjuirirs sliall not extend 
to the validity of second contr-acts, unless tlie first has been set aside by 
the Pr-esidcnt, or* the parties had consented, irr writing, tiiat the first shoirld 
be set aside. It was stated in the abstract ol Cohniel llogair, transmitted 
to him arrd his associates, Messrs. Bur-rrey and Amiersorr, «»n the 11th 
Mar-ch, 183G, that the first had been given up." Believing, sir-, as I d(», 
tliat, if tliese irrstructions are firral, and the coinmissiorrer-s are to be 
goverrred, by them, it will operate heavily on a class of irrnocent pur- 
chasers, who made tlieir contr-acts in good faith, and irmler the frr-m belief 
tliat they would be protected by the Government, I mirst ask the favor 
that yoir would irrquire into the whole matter, and so modify the instr-uc- 
tions as to authorize the commissiorrers to sanctiorr sncli recertified cases 
as shall a|)pear to them to have beerr fnirly made, and such contracts not 
certified as were rirade after the publication, by General Jesiip, of his 
instr-uctions, as shall appear to be fair and honest. By adopting this 
course, this long and rrtij)leasant contr-oversy will be brought to a close ; 
withorrt it, hirndreds of industrious and honest citizens, who were never 
engaged irr the speculation, must inevitably be ruined, and for- years to conre 
will our- c(nirts be filled with cases gi-owing out of disprrted land titles. 

Yoirr- early attentiorr to this subject will oblige, sir-, your- obedient ser- 
vant, 

JOSEPH BRYAX. 

Hon. J. R. Poinsett, 

Secretary of War. 



Washington city, October 19, 1837. 
Sir : I have received, throrrgh your- kindrress. a copy of the letter of the 
17th instant, addr-essed to Joseph IJryan. Esfjiiire. The heavy amount of 
larrded estate irr my district d( pending orr the decisicni of the Secretar-y of 
M ar, and the report of the commissioners appointed to investigate the va- 
lidity of contracts made in the sale of Creek Indiarr r'eser-vatitns ; and 
the fact that a coritr-act for- a large amount of sik h r-eser-vations, adver-se 
to the interest of other purchasers, has beerr latilied by the Governmerrt, in 



[ Doc. No. 274. J 131 

favor of James C. NVatson ami others, I must ask of you to send inc a 
copy of tl«e opinion of Messrs. Crawford and Balcli, wiio were charged 
witii tlie investigation of said contt art, and wiio made, severally, a j-eport 
on said contract to tlie President. I have in my possession a copy of said 
conti'iict and of its confirinatioii by the Pi-esident ; and thoiigli I liave seen 
in the olKce t!ie opinions of Messrs. Crawford and Balch, I have never 
had a copy of them, and therefore have not given them a critical examina- 
tion. My inijjression is, ihat the principle Iai<l down iti the answer to Mr. 
I3r-yatrs letter will throw into this contract a large amount of land 
which was originally fraudulently jjurchased, but which fraudulent pur- 
chases were afterwards set aside, and fair and bona fide contracts made 
for tl.em. The importance of this question to tliose I represent must be 
tny excuse for troubling the Dcj)artmcnt for a copy of these opinions. 
Will you iiave the kindness to hdve thr* jiackage enclosing said opinions 
direcleil. through the post olKce. to Mr. Edward Stelle, assistant libra- 
rian of Congress, who, with otliei" papers, will see that it is forwarded 
to me ? 

[ am, very resjicctfully, sir, your obedient servant, 

DIXON H. LEWIS. 

Hon. Joel R. Poinsett, 

b'ccretdry of (Var. 

P. S. I desire (hat the aforesaid opinions be sent to Mr. Stelle as soon 
as possible, that I may not be delayed in receiving them. 



Gadsby's Hotel, October 26, 1837. 

Sir : I have t.i ask the favor of you to cause me to be furnished with 
the various communications made by Judge Iverson to the War Depart- 
ment, on the subject of the contract luade by cei-tain Cieek Indian chiefs 
with General J iuies C.Watson and others, uiuler dates September 16, 
1835; September 25. 1835 ; October 29. 1835, and January 24, 1837. 
It is impoitant to the interest of the various ])ersons whom I represent that I 
should be furnished with a copy of the communications at as early a day as 
j)racticable. 

I have the honor to be, very respectfully, your obedient servant, 

JOSEPH BRYAN. 

P. S. I have in my possession a letter from the Hon. J. R. Poinsett, 
Secretary of War, in wliich the Secretary remarks " tiiat an opportunity 
w ill be afforded to establish secotul contracts." The letters above referred 
to are wanted for the ])urpose of enabling the parties claiming under 
second contracts, and in oj)j)nsition to the contract of General J. C Wat- 
son and others, to bring the whole matter fairly before tlie Secretary of War, 
after the rep<irt of Messrs. Crawford and Balch shall have been made. 

JOSEPH BRYAN. 

C. A. Harris, Esq. 



Washington, Ocfofter 28, 1837. 
Sir : Upon inspection of a letter addressed by Judge Iverson to the 
Hon. B. F. Butler, Secretary of War, a copy of which was furnished to 



132 [ Doc, No. 274. J 

me yesterday, I find that Judge Iverson refers to a proposition embra- 
cing Ji plan wliicli may possibly obviate ohjeclioiis to tl>e approval of the 
roiitiarl madi' with (iem'ral J. C. NVatson n?id others. He says farther, 
that Gener-al W. \vi)l siihinit it whefiever tlie Secretary will be pleased to 
receive it. Tlie letter of Judge Iverson beais date the 24th January, 1837. 

I respectfully ask, if any such ])ropt>sition or jdau was »t>binitted, 
that I may be furnished with a copy of it, for the reasons exjjrcssed in my 
letter of the 20th instant, aski?ig for copies ot certain couiinunications of 
Judge Iverson. 

I have the honor to be, \ery respectfully, yowr obedient servant, 

JOSEPH BRYAN. 

lion. C. A. Uabkis, Esq. 



LovvNDESBOKOL'GH, AxABAMA, Dcceiubcr 4, 1837. 

Sm : I have been confined to my bed for some time by an itidisj)osition, 
from whicli I am recovering, but shall probably »)ot be able to get to 
Washington until between the 15th or 20lh of this n)otith. I feel, iiowever, 
so much interest in the iej)oi-t of the coMiinissiorn'ivs chai-geii with the 
examination of Cieek Indian frauds, tiiat I must ask of you to susihtkI a 
decision on tliem till I can reach Washington. In a conference which (Jol. 
King and myself hail with you or) that subject during the extra session, 
you proiuised that wc should have an op|)ortunity of examining the report 
of the commissioners, and of canvassing the same, before your decision 
should be made. 

This is all-important, as it involves lands in my district to the value of 
millions of dollars; and the unconditional confirmation of what is called 
Watson's contract, embracing what is claimed under it, would deprive 
hundi-eds of prior bona Jide purchasers, whose contracts were certified 
before tiie accredited agent of the Government, of n>ore than a million of 
dollars. That contract, at best, is in violation of the ti-eaty : and if its 
operation is extended to tiiis class of lands, will give rise to a litigation 
for i-eal estate, from which our courts cannot be relieved for the next 
twenty years. In my anxiety to j»rotcct these bona fide pui-chasers. many 
of whom are the most res{)ectablc citizens of the State — against whon>, in 
all the investigations, not a bieath of suspicion has been raised — I must 
ask you to suspend any action till I shall be able to reach Washington, 
which will not be later tliati the 20tli of tiiis month. I would also be glad 
that the report of the commissioners, who investigated the value of pro- 
perty destroyed by the Creek Indians, should not be reported to Congress 
till my arrival. 

I liave the honor to be, sir, very respectfully, vour ol»edient servant, 

DIXON U. LEWIS. 

Hon. J. R. Poinsett, 

Secretary of IVar. 



Custom-house, Mobile, AiiABAWA, 

December 1 1, 1837. 
Sir : The enclosed letter, which lias been addressed to me, is from Dr. 
Kobert J. Ware, a highly lespectable citizen of Montgomery county, and 
for several years a member of the Legislaturc^uf this State. As an act of 



[ Doc. ^o, 274. ] 133 

common justice to Dr. Ware and others, I beg leave to lay the same before 
your excellency, and to say, that if called on ofikially, I shall have no 
hesitation in answering all the inquiries contained in his letter, or any 
other that the Govenmient may desire me to answer, in relation to the 
*» big contract," as it is called, of upwards of 200,000 acres of land being 
sold for S75,000. 

1 liave the honor to remain, your excellency's most obedient servant, 

JOHN B. HOGAN. 

To His Excellency Martin Van Buren. 



Montgomery, December Q, 1837. 

Dear Sir : As an act of justice to myself, as well as a numerous class 
of individuals, a large portion of whom are now living in the late Creek 
country, and who are interested in the decision of the President about to 
be had in relation to the contract existing between certain chiefs of the 
Creek nation, and Watson, Walker, and others, and known as the big 
contract, I feel bound to call u|)on you to state wliat you know in i"t'U.tioa 
to said contract ; the manner iti whicli it was gotten up by Captain Page 
& Co. of the United States army ; whether the sum given is a fair equiv- 
alent — say ^75,000 ; and if said contract will not have the effect of shield- 
ing those persons who were so deejjly engaged in what is called stealing 
the IndiaJis lands; and whether you consider the recertified contracts 
executed before Dr. McHeniy, * * * was the ti'ue holderof the land ; and 
whether or not you considei", as an act of justice to tlje bona Cu\e [iui'cha- 
ser, that the Pi-esident should sanction all bona fide purchases made prior 
to tlie date of the big contract, wliether the same be certified to or not. 
You are appi-ized, sir, that in many cases the true holder had sold and 
received the full amount agreed upon, and others a part only, there being 
no oj)portutiity to have the contract passed before the Govei-nment agent ; 
the i)urchaser ready at any time to pay the remainder, and the Ijidian to 
close the bai-gain : all of which could not take place, and did not take 
place, on account of tiiose land rogues. Should not the President sustain 
all such cases, when an equivalent had been paid, or when a part iiad been 
paid and the j)urchaser willing to pay the lemainder? Will you give me 
your opinion fi-eely and fully on the whole subject? 

From the various conversations you have had with myself and others, 
and knowing that you are fully acquainted with the subject, and that your 
(qnnioiis will have weight at Washington, I thougiit proper to address you 
this hasty letter, believing you have a w ish to see this matter settled in ac- 
cordance with justice and equity to all parties ; exposing those who are 
guilty, and sustaining those who may be innocent. 

In haste, your obedient servant, 

ROBERT J. WARE. 

Col. Jno. B. Hogan. 

N. B. I should be glad to hear from you at an early day, as I intend 
to use the same should I find it necessary. R. J. WARE 



134 [ Doc. No. 274. ] 

Ckeek Agency, Fort Gibson, 

Odober 20, 18Sr. 
Sik: I (i-iuisniit ln>rc\\i(li ceitain papfMs irlativo t.> a iici^iitiafniii between 
Cliarles J. M(l)<ii)al(l i;: Co., and Uie |niii<i))al rliiels dI' llie Creek nation. 
In:- ihe [juicliasc uT ilie residue oTilieir unsold lands in Alabama. 
I bavc the lionor to be, \oiii- most obedient servant, 

J. ^V. A. SANFORD. 

Creek Jniliiin Jgsnt. 
C. A. IIakkis, 

Commissioner Indian .affairs, IVoshinglon City. 



TUCKARATCIIEE Sqi'ARF-jCuEEK NaTION, 

October 7, 1837. 
Our Fuienh and Aoext : A coin|)any, under tlie style oC Charles J. 
McDonald 6i. Co., of Georgia, have in the last lew days submitted to ns 
:i |)i(»|iosiiiun foi* the pnreiiase (d" all unsold and unapproved locations, 
being the projierty oi' our people whilst lesiding in Alabama, and which, 
in Justice anil according to treaty, still belong to them. "We have Just 
witnessed the final selllinient of a similar contr-act. inado with General 
Josup, atTallassee. Again, authorized to act foi" otii- |)eople, we know no 
reason why we should not again exercise the same r iglit in the case now 
belorc us, as well as in the one which we have just mentioned. Our pow- 
er is the same, the subject the san)e, the treaty the same. You have indeed 
inlorMied us that Congress, at its last session, passed an act directing the 
lands in (piestion to bo sold lor the benefit of the j)arties concerned. We 
know r.uv voice has gi-owii too feeble of late to be heard ; but in our hum- 
ble opinion, neithei- tiuje, change of residence, nor any oiher circumstance 
whatever, ran impair our rights, or divest our people «)f their propeity, 
without their immediate agency or consent. We speak this not in disre- 
spi'ct of t!ie Government or its authoiities ; we indulge not the slightest 
wish to cavil at any act having even the sen)blancc of favor* or kindness 
towards ouiselves or oui* j)eople ; for, although the law which you have 
mentioned is. in our conce|)ti()n, a manifest violation of every principle 
which sauctiiies the posscssi(m of projierty, and secures it agaiu'^t arbitrary 
and lawless seizure, and as such would have been denounceil had the in- 
dividual rights ol" our white brothers been in controversy ; still we wercde- 
tcrmiuf'd to await its operation in silence, in the hope that it would event- 
ually work to our advantage. lint we have not long been permitted to 
indulge even tliis deluded hoj)e. Already has our ((uinti-y been inlVstt'd 
with a class of |)ersoi's who, under Various pretexts, have l)eeii secretly 
equipping tliemselves with fictitious j)Uicliases anil foiged powers of attor- 
ney, prepaiatoi-y to the sales which aie expected to take place, and who 
shrewdly calculate, by the exhibition of these iniipiitous contrivances, to 
intimidate other j)urcliasers, and thus to secure to themselves, at their own 
price, all liie land of any real value. Past experience has clearly shown 



[ Doc. No. 271. ] 135 

the utter futility and impracticability of atte!Tii)ting to thwart the efforts of 
such a combination ; the public fears vvilJ become awakened, and the con- 
sequence will be, that few will be found bold or inconsiderate enough to 
embark in purchases which, in the very outset, aje threatened with law- 
suits and controversy. Under these circumstances, we plainly foiesee tliat 
the measure designed for our pi-otection must fail in its objrct, and the 
intended public sale will only result in tlie renewal of former disappoint- 
ments. We liave, therefore, u|)on calm and due i-ellection, being fuliy and 
duly authorized by all j)arties whatsoever, concluded a bargain and sale of 
certain lands, as set forth in the contract h(>rewi(h accompanying, witit 
Charles J. McDonald &, Co., and which we desire niay be transmitted to 
the President, to tiie eml that the latter clause of said agreement may be 
executed with as little delay as possible. We have already disavowed any 
controversial wish otj our pait with tiie Govei-nment or its authoiities ; 
we do not believe the assertion of our I'ight a violation of this protVssion ; 
we claim alone the privilege of disposing of what has been solemnly guar- 
antied and (letermiiied by treaty to be oui- own ; we claim tliis, in the 
fullest conviction that tlie rigiit is exclusively our own, and inalienable 
except through our agency and consent. We claim its exercise rn)w, be- 
cause we are as fully impowered to act as we were in making the treaty 
itself, or upon any «)fher occasion subsequent to that })erio(l ; we claim 
that the contract entered into w.ith Charles J. McDonald & Co., beifig the 
only iiglitl'ul transaction relative to the lands in controversy, be laid be- 
fore the President, and his sanction to tlie same be solicited. 
Your friends ^nd brothers, 
IVitnesses. Opothe Yoholo, his x mark. 

,Tohn Page, Special Agent. Little Doctor, his x mark. 

James L. Alexander. Tuckabatchee Micco his x maik. 

F. A.Kerr. Tuckabatchee Hadjo his x mark. 

IJarent Dubois. James Isleands, his x mark. 

Jacob Elliot, Interpreter. 

Gen. JoHiv W. A. Sanford, 

Creek t/igent, Fort Gibson. 



Creek Nation, ") 
Arkansas territory, j 

This indenture, made and concluded at the Tuckabatchee square, in the 
Creek nation, in full counri! as^etnbleU on the 7th day of October, 1837, 
between Opothe Yoholo, Little Doctor, Tuckabatchee Micco, Ar-beck- 
oge Emarthlar, Tuckabatchee Fixico, TaliasHoe Fixico, Tiisronee 
lladjo. Hellebee Hadjo, Osooch Fixico, Spoakoak Micco. Tomelee, Hobie 
Fixico, Pascoaf Emarthlar, Narhouche Fixico, James Isieatids, Arlock 
Hadjo, Coosee Micco, Arbea Emarthlar, Tustennugge Emarthlar. 'j'usta- 
nug Hadjo, !nne Emaithlar. Hobie Hatka, ('onesce Emartlilar, Sally 
Cogy, Tuskeega Micco, Langhtaniadaughaw, Koomul Hadjo, Fus Hadjo, 
Tuckabatchee Hadjo, Cotchii Tiiskanugga, Yardaca Tuskanugga, Seclie 
Cornols, chiefs ami headmen of the Creek ti'ibe of Indians, for themselves 
and for their people on the one paj-t ; and Charles J. McDonald and 
company, of Georgia, on the other part, witnesseth : That whereas, by 



136 [ Doc. No. 274. ] 

a treaty made and ratified, at the rily ol" Wasliingtun, in the year of our* 
Lord one tliitiisaiid eii'lit Imtidied and tliiitv-two, between tlie United 
States «if America and said tribe ot" Indians, it was stipulated, anions 
other tilings, that the head oC <'a(h family hehmging to said tribe should 
have and receive one half section of land, to be located in the country 
then ceded, atid said lands having been assigned to the individuals thus 
entitled, agreeably to the provisions of said treaty : and whereas, the 
speedy removal of our people after the termination of the late hostilities 
compelled many to abandon the lands w hich had been thus acquired, and to 
leave tiie same unsold: Now, be it known that we, the above-written 
chiefs and head men, being fully authorized and impowered by said claim- 
ants, rcservees, and all other- parties in interest, in virtue of said treaty, 
and fully representing all and each of them, for* and in consider-ation of the 
surr) of sixty-six thousand fivehundr-cd dollars, to be paid under the superin- 
tendence of an agent to be ajjpointed by the President, whenever' this con- 
tract shall have been approved by the l*r-esident, do bargain, sell, release, 
and forever <piit claim to the said Charles J. M( Donald and Co., all such 
reservations as ar-e herein mentioned, to wit : All such lands as have never 
been sold or cer'tified ; all such other lands as may have heerr sold, op 
conveyed away in any other- manner' tlian by the authority an«l sanction of 
the President, and which, in justire, still belong to the or'iginal holder, or* 
their descendants; all the dead locations,. that is to say, ail the reserva- 
tions, or* the claims arising therefrom, <d" such Indiatrs as may have died 
before or* since their* lands were assigned tlierrr ; all the afbiementioned 
lands, situate, lying, and being in the State of Alabama, ami in tiiat par-t 
ceded by the aforementioned treaty : said lands being those located to said 
claimants, reser'vees, &c. as by treaty pr'ovided and dir'ected. And it is 
frrrlher agreed, in consideration of the jjr'emises, that the President shall 
issue patents to the said Charles J. McDonald & Co., upon receiving satis- 
factory evidence that the sum specified in this contr-act has beerr paid. 
In testimony whereof, we, the said chiefs and headmen of said Cr-eek 
tribe, have hereunto set our hands and atUxed our seals, the dny and date 
above written. 

0[!othe Yoholo his x mark. 

Little Doctor" his x mark. 

Tuckabatchee Micco his x mark. 

Arheckoge ?'.marthlar his x mat k. 

Tuckabatchee Fixico his x mar'k. 

Tallassee Fixico his x mark. 

Ttiscorree lladjo his x mark. 

Hellebee Iladj(» his x mar k. 

Osooch Fixico his x tmuk. 

Spoakoak Micco his x mat k. 

Tomelee his x mark. 

Ilobie Fixico his x mat k. 

Pascoaf Emarthlar' his x mark. 

Narbouche Fixico his x mark. 

James Ishands, his x mar-k. 

Arlock lladjo his x mark. 

Coosec Micco his x mark. 

Arbea Emarthlar his x mar-k. 

TustennuggeEmarlhlarhis x mark. 



[ Doc. No. 274. I 137 

Tustanag Hadjo his x mark. 

Inrie Emarthlar liis x maiU. 

Hobie Hatka liis x mark. 

Coiiesee Etnarthlar his x mark. 

Sally Cogy liis x mark. 

Tuskeega Micco his x mark. 

Witness : Laiightamadaughaw his x mark. 

John Page, Koomiil Hadjo his x mark. 

Special Jgeni. Fus Hadjo liis x mark. 

James L. Alexander, Tuckabatchee Hadjo his x mark. 

F, A. Kerr, Gotcha Tuskanugga his x mark. 

IJarent Dubois, Yardaca Tuskanugga his x mark. 

Jacob Elliott, Interpreter, Scehe Cornols his x mark. 



Creek Agency, Fort GiBsojir, 

October 10, 1837. 
My Friends: Your letter of the 7th instant, informing me of your 
having negotiated a sale for the residue of the lands belonging to your 
people, whilst residing in Alabama, with Charles J. McDonald & Co., of 
Georgia, was handed me this morning. As the contract has been referred 
directly to the decision of the President, it will be transmitted to him in 
due time, fortiiat purpose. 

In your letter you have particulaily remarked the practices of certain 
persons as having jjrincipally influenced your decision in the matter. 11, 
indeed, their machinations are of the character which you mention, and 
are likely to be attended with the consequences you ajjprehend, you have 
none to blame but yourselves. Again and again have I advised you to an 
energetic course of conduct towards those whom you find intermeddling 
with your prerogative, or with the affairs of your people. What I have 
said to you already, 1 say to you again — instantly seize all such persons, 
and bring them before the agent. The Government is disposed to protect 
you, at all hazards, against their intrusion; and you may rest assured of 
a prompt co-operation on my part, in carrying out its views. 

Your friend and agent. 

J. W. A. SANFORD. 
To Opothe Yoholo, 

and other principal chiefs, Creek nation. 



"Washington city, December SO, 1837. 
Sir: I have the honor to submit to your consideration the enclosed 
papers, consisting of a contract made between the chiefs of the Creek 
nation of Indians and C. J. McDonald & Co., and letters between the 
chiefs and their agent. 

Tiiese papers have been intrusted to my care by Judge McDonald, and 
I am authorized to represent him and his associates in calling the attention 
of the Department to the contract submitted. 

I have to request its consideration as early as will suit your conveni- 
ence, and beg to be allowed to present some views upon the subject before 
any final decision is made upon it. , 

[ am, respectfully, &c., 

A. 1 VERS ON. 
C. A. Harris, Commissioner, ^c. 



138 [ Doc. No. 274. ] 

Washington city, Januarij 4, 1838. 

Sir: I lierewitli submit the report of Ca|)taiii Jolm Page, special agent 
appointed t«» pay out certain moneys, and obtain the ratification of the 
individuni reservees to the contract made between certain chiefs of the 
Creek natiofi of Indians, and James C. "Watson & Co., for the contested 
claim in Mclleniy's district, Alabama. 

Arcf)inpHnying tlie leport of Captain Page are tlie written acknowledg- 
ments of the Indians, and tlie certificate ot Captain Page in each case of 
the identify tif the owiiei% and of the icceipt ol the money by him, agreeably 
to insti'iictions issued IVoin the War Dej)artment. 

In behalf of the paitics to this contract. I have now to ask that an 
agent or commissioner be immediately appointed, according to the stipu- 
lation of the same, foi- the purpose of adjusting ami deciding all cases of 
contest between James C. Watson & Co., and other claimants to the lands 
cmbiacetl in it. I am instructed by James C. Watson & Co. to ask that 
a new commission be instituted, for the jiurpose above stated, iti ordei- 
that the lights of the parties may be submitted to a tribunal wholly un- 
occupied and unprejudiced upon the subjects in controversy. I am also 
instructed to ask tiiat patents may issue as soon as j)racticable for all 
the lands embr-aced in this contract which are free IVom dispute or contest. 
A wiy large amount of money has !)een paid out by the purchaser-s 
under tliis contract, which it is very desirous to reimburse, but which 
cannot be done safely or advantageously until the patents issue. 
I am, respectfully, vour obedient servant. 

A. IVERSON. 

C. A, IIaukis, Esq., Counnis-r Iviliun Jiffairs. 



Arkansas uivkr, J^ovemher 10, 1837. 

Sir : I have the hojior to forward the sevei-al bonds taken of the Creek 
Indians, agieeably to a contract made by James C. Watson and Co. The 
Indiatis were collected in full council, by General J. W. A. Sanford. their 
agent; and after remaining in council sevei-al days, and a list furnished 
each chief of the din'erent towns that were entitled to the money, agreea- 
bly to the abstract fui-nished by the Department, and the amount jiut 
opposite each man's oi- woman's name that was due them, and theii- names 
read over re|)eafe()ly in council until all was familiar to them, I pioceeded 
to pay out the money. I confined niyself as strictly to my instructions as 
it was possible for me to do. All was satisfactory to the Indians. They 
stated the money had come at a very ap()i-o|)riate time, as there had been 
a great deal of sickness among them ; and cold weather setting in, it enabled 
a great many Indians with families, that were jjoor and destitute, to purchase 
blankets and other aiticles of clotliing that they were suffering foi-. 

Interest on the note was demanded, and I recjuired tlie company to pay 
it; which they did, (about sixteen hundred (hdlars. ) 

Tliere will be a few signatures I have imt been able to obtain, but will 
procure them hereafter, if |)ossibIe. As the papers will be so bulky, I 
have suggested to the company the projjiiety of sending them by express, 
which I presume they will do. 

\N ith respect, I have the honor to be vnur oliedient servant, 

' JOHN PAGE, Spechd Jigcnt. 

C. A. Uarbis, Esq., Conim/s'r Indian ,6tffairSf ff'ashington. 



[Doc. No. 274. ] 139 

Fomi of the assent given by the Creek reservees to the contract or agree- 
ment of \%2Q, 

Western Creek nation, ") 
*8.rkansas. J 

Be it known tt) all men, that I, do hereby acknowledge, rat- 

ify, and confirm the contract or agreement made and entered into at 
Tallassee, in the State of Alabama, on the twenty-eighth day of August, 
in tlie year eighteen hundred and thirty-six, between James C Watson, 
William Walker, Edward Hanrirk, P. C. Harris, and John Peabody, of 
the first pai-t ; Opothc Yoholo, Mad Blue, Tuckabatciiee Micco, Little 
Doctor, Jim Boy, Tustenugge Chopco, and Tusconee Hadjo, chiefs 
of said nation, of the second j)art ; and General Tiiomas S. Jesup, of the 
United States army, and as the agent of the United States, of the tiiird 
part : by which it was agreed and contracted, amongst other things, that 
liic said cl^iefs repi-esenting their j)eopIe, the individual ownei's, sold to 
the said James C Watson and others, for tlie consideration therein ex- 
pressed, certain reserves of land lying witliin the district commonly 
called Robert McHenry's district, in that poi-tion of country known as the 
Creek country, in the State of Alabama, and which were located to cer- 
tain Creek Indians, agreeably to a treaty made between the Government 
of the United States and the said Creek nation of Indians, on the 24tlj 
<Iay of March, 1832, as will more fully appear by reference to said con- 
tract. And I, the said . do hereby acknowledge and make knowii 
that said chiefs had free and ample power and authority to make and enter 
into said contract, for and in behalf of tlie individual reservees of said 
land ; and more especially tliat the said chiefs had power and authority 
from me to bargain, sell, and convey, with the approbation of the Presi- 
dent of the U'lited States, to the said James C. Watson et aliis half 
section in townsliip mimber and range number in the county 
of and State of Alabama ; the same being the tract of land located 
to me and in my name, in conformity with the treaty above mentioned : 
and I do hereby i-atify and confirm the sale of said half section, as fully 
and completely as if the same had been done in pei'son by myself; and I, 
the said do hereby also acknowledge, that I have received 
front the said James C. Watson & Co. a full and fair consideration in 
money, for my said half section of land. In testimony whereof, I have 
hereunto set my hand and seal, this day of 1837. 

In presence of [l. s.j 

I, ,Tohn Page, special agent, do hereby certify that the above 
is liie bona fide owner of the half section of land designated in the forego- 
ing acknowledgment, and that he has received from James C. Watson 
k. Co. the sum of dollars ; and that I consider the san»e a just 

an(l fair pioportion to the said of the sum of seventy-five 

thousand dollars, which forms the consideration of said contract, and here- 
by recommend the same for the approval of the President of the United 
States, this day of 1837. 

JOHN PAGE, Special Jlgent. 



140 



[ Doc. No. 274. ] 



Statement of the reservees tmder the Creek treaty of 2'\th March, 1832, 
ivho have given their assent to the contract, for the reserves herein 
described, entered into tlie 2Sth day of Jiugust, 1836, between J. C. 
Watson and others, certain Creek chiefs, and Ge7i. Thomas S. Jesup. 





Indian names. 


County. 


Location. 






cs 








t. 






u 
O 




IE 




£ 
1 






c 

u 

u 


o 

6 


c 


V 

bo 

c 




Autauga town. 












4 


Sur-war-ni Iladjo 


Macon 


E. half 


17 


16 


21 


5 


To-maiis Emaitlilar 


do 


E. half 


8 


16 


21 


6 


IlnbiP 


do 


E. half 


20 


16 


21 


10 


Choak-cliar Fixico 


do 


S. half 


21 


16 


21 


13 


Tal-Ie-gc Fixico 


do 


S. half 


15 


16 


21 


22 


Co-c-giis Iladjo 


do 


S. half 


25 


16 


21 


23 


MiccD Halka 


do 


N. half 


25 


16 


21 


24 


To-biis-sulc Fixico 


do 


E. half 


24 


16 


21 


27 


0-chas Hadjo 


do 


W. half 


13 


16 


21 


29 


Cu-bi-cacli-clie Hadjo 


do 


S. half 


14 


16 


21 


SO 


Ko-iiij) Hadjo 


do 


E. half 


10 


16 


21 


31 


0-leai--clie Hadjo 


do 


W. half 


10 


16 


21 


33 


Mirco-biis-tiis-ku 


do 


W. half 


11 


16 


21 


34 


U-fau-Ia Hadjo 


do 


N. half 


12 


16 


21 


36 


To-scc-bo-b()o-hat-k('C 


do 


E. half 


1 


15 


21 


S7 


Fixico Hadjo 


do 


E. half 


2 


15 


21 


39 


Tallas-sce Hadjo 


do 


W. half 


2 


15 


21 


40 


Fiis-suck-kc-a iladjo 


do 


E. half 


S 


15 


25 


43 


Se-ne-i-e 


do 


E. half 


11 


15 


21 


47 


Ar-fis-tar 


do 


E. half 


14 


15 


21 


43 


Cle-iDarth Hadjo 


do 


E. half 


24 


15 


£1 


49 


Jock-lio-mi-go 


do 


S. half 


6 


15 


22 


50 


Tu-we-ga 


do 


E. half 


7 


15 


22 


51 


Mar-litch-char 


do 


W. half 


7 


15 


22 


52 


E-n»artlilar 

Luchipoga town. 


do 


E. half 


31 


16 


22 


6 


Eacb-bas Hadjo 


do 


E. half 


30 


18 


25 


7 


Fiis Hadjo 


do 


E. half 


21 


19 


25 


10 


Ar-dic.c«)n Hadjo 


do 


W. half 


23 


19 


25 


17 


War-so-e Malta 


do 


S. half 


3 


18 


24 


20 


Woc-se Yobolo 


do 


N. half 


21 


19 


26 


26 


Ilulliibba Hadjo 


do 


W. half 


31 


18 


25 


32 


Tuck-ta-ljiis-ta 


do 


N. half 


23 


19 


24 


33 


Woc-se Hadjo 


do 


N. half 


1 


18 


24 



[ Doc. No. 274. ] 

STATEMENT— Continued. 



141 









Location. 




^ 


c 








Indian names. 


County. 


a. 


_0 












5 


01 


In 




(U 






e 


(m 




o 


^ 






_o 


3 


p 


ko 


6 






o 


d 


o 


c 


3 

t5 








12; 


h 


» 


34 


Fiisliatrhe 'I'ustcniingga - 


Macon 


S. half 


8 


18 


25 


S7 


Po-ith Ha(Jj() 


do 


S. half 


4 


18 


24 


S8 


C!ias-se Hadjo 


do 


S. lialf 


25 


18 


24 


41 


Oak-liis-ka 


Clianibers 


E. bale 


30 


20 


26 


43 


Hi II is Hadjo 


Macon 


N. balf 


3 


18 


26 


47 


Cue Eiiiarthlar 


do 


E. balf 


10 


19 


25 


48 


Emat-lo-clie 


do 


S. half 


6 


18 


25 


51 


Oc-te-ar-clic Fixico 


do 


N. half 


6 


18 


25 


52 


Oc-te-ar-clie Hatljo 


do 


E. balf 


23 


19 


25 


55 


In-ne-hai- Fixico 


do 


S. half 


35 


6 


24 


65 


Con-nar-his-che 


do 


N. half 


7 


18 


25 


66 


So-ai*th-Ie-be 


do 


S. balf 


12 


18 


24 


68 


Mo-lie-ab 


do 


N. half 


14 


18 


14 


69 


Icli-has Micco 


do 


N. half 


18 


25 


25 


73 


Fet-to-par-sa 


do 


N. half 


24 


18 


24 


74 


Ar-gis sa 


do 


W. half 


19 


18 


25 


75 


Fai-no-me (or Sar-no-mc) 


do 


\V. half 


SO 


18 


25 


77 


O-hi-at-kai- 


do 


N. balf 


36 


18 


24 


78 


Yol-uo-ga 


d.) 


E. half 


34 


19 


25 


80 


0-te-kar 


do 


S. balf 


4 


17 


25 


81 


Mar-(jue-!io-kie 


do 


N. half 


5 


17 


25 


84 


Hicli co-yo. 


do 


S. balf 


26 


19 


25 


87 


Clii)ck-ka lio-gua 


do 


W. half 


29 


19 


25 


88 


Cai-bit-tiiiiHa 


do 


E. half 


3 


18 


25 


89 


C()l)-bes-clia 


do 


S. balf 


7 


18 


25 


91 


Haji> (or Harkie) 


do 


N. half 


35 


19 


24 


95 


So-l'un-go 


do 


E. half 


27 


19 


25 


96 


Im-foi-hie-mic 


Cbantbers 


W. half 


30 


20 


26 


97 


Sar-tlu-clic 


Macon 


W. half 


16 


19 


25 


98 


Oak-lar-na 


do 


S. half 


8 


19 


25 


100 


In-lii Yiir-liaj'-gai' 


do 


W. balf 


9 


19 


25 


103 


Fic-e CO Yatch-a 


do 


W. half 


10 


18 


23 


104 


Sar-wi-yo-ga 


do 


E. balf 


28 


19 


25 


109 


Ar-butcli-clia 


do 


W. balf 


SO 


19 


25 


117 


Im lieach-kae 


do 


N. balf 


25 


19 


24 


120 


Si-lio-iat-tae 


do 


>V. balf 


34 


19 


25 


124 


Mi( CO Cliarte (or Chopco) 


do 


S. half 


2 


17 


24 


132 


Soap-car 


do 


N. half 


19 


19 


24 


133 


Se-ar-kar-bie 


do 


E. half 


15 


19 


24 


138 


Co-cbar Emarthlar 


do 


S. half 


27 


18 


25 


140 


Hepsey 


do 


N. half 


15 


18 


25 



142 



[ Doc. No. 274. J 
STATEM ENT— Continued. 



Indian names. 



County. 



Ifli-lias Fixiro 

l*in-i;ar-l('acli-kar 

Ar-cli-clia 

Eiisliatclia Iladjo 

Rose 

Ar-wc-liigga 

Ne-liai'-loc-co-clie 

Li-la 

Cuosa Emartlilai* 

Clie-ar-liar 

M()C-qu:i-gaii 

Si lie V 

Cliu Emarthlar 

Ufaiila town. 

Lottc YoImiIo 

'I'us-sicU-ic Uadjij 

Tvlar 

Ar-tic-ca 

Chis-se Iladjo 

llin-iic'-liow 

Spoak-rali Mirco 

Nc-liaw-lac-ra Hadju 

Fixico Hadjd 

Coii-cliar-to Emartlilar 

In-ne-liai' Fixico 

Atli-loii Iladjo 

Sit-lii-ti-ga 

Un-dell Iladjo 

M irco-rlio-lio-l\o-no-se 

Yar-bolli-le 

Nee-oak-kic 

Clior Yo'iolo 

Al-had Iladjo 

TiK k a-Uatche Had jo 

ls-to|.|ii-(lie 

Cock-ra-li-go 

O-rlic Iladjo 

l*ar-fns-li-ga 

To-inic-ti'a-clia 



Macon 
do 
do 
do 
do 
d.» 
do 
do 
do 
do 
do 
do 
do 



Tallapoosa 

do 

do 
Coosa • 
Tallapoosa 

do 
Coosa 
'ralla[)oosa 

do 
Coosa 

do 

do 

do 
l'allaj)0()sa 
Cc;osa 

do 
Tallapoosa 

do 

do 

do 

<lo 

do 

do 
Coosa 
Tallapoosa 



Locaiion. 



N. half 
W. half 
N. half 
E. half 
N. half 
S. half 
S. half 
half 
half 
half 
W. half 
8. half 
E. half 



S. 

N. 
S. 



S. 

w. 

E. 

N. 
N. 
N. 
E. 



half 
half 
half 
half 
half 
half 
half 



W. half 
W. half 
S. half 



E. 

S. 
N. 
E. 
W. 

N. 
S. 



half 
half 
half 
half 
half 
half 
half 
W. half 
S. half 
E. half 
S. hair 
N. hall 
S. half 
W. half 
W. half 



9 
28 
12 
5!i 
22 

6 
20 

1 
13 
36 
S2 
24 
IG 



22 
\7 
24 

9 
31 
35 

5 

19 
29 
30 
26 

8 
31 
34 

9 
13 

7 
20 
36 
29 
32 
24 
31 

7 
29 



19 
19 
18 
19 
18 
17 
19 
17 
18 
18 
19 
18 
19 



21 
21 
21 
20 
21 
21 
20 
21 
21 
20 
20 
20 
20 
21 
20 
20 
21 
21 
21 
21 
21 
21 
21 
20 
21 



I Doc. No. 274. J 

STATEMENT—Continued. 



143 





Indian names. 


County. 


Location. 




a 

a. 


c 


.£• 










o 

c 


ft) 

in 


"m 


V 


^ 






_g 


O 


^ 


bO 


£ 






u 


6 


O 


s 

£8 


1 








;z; 


h 


P3 


46 


Col-laii-der 


Coosa 


N. half 


6 


20 


22 


47 


Tal-Iea-cliet* 


do 


W. half 


26 


20 


22 


49 


Ue-li-hea-clier 


Tallapoosa 


S. half 


26 


21 


24 


50 


0-gil lis-sin-nc-liaw 


do 


S. half 


35 


21 


23 


51 


So-mea-lea-gcr 


Coosa 


S. half 


1 


20 


24 


53 


Mo lia-lig-tat- 


do 


N. half 


1 


20 


24 


56 


O-soocli Hadjo 


do 


S. half 


3 


20 


24 


57 


Ufaii'a Hadjo 


do 


E. half 


1 


20 


24 


58 


So-de-dun-iia Hadjo 


Tallapoosa 


E. half 


29 


21 


24 


59 


Af-ar-le 


Coosa 


E. half 


3 


20 


23 


61 


E-fai'-tiis-tan-nug-ga 


do 


N. half 


10 


20 


23 


62 


Sa-ga-nic 


do 


W. half 


2 


20 


24 


63 


Al-go-jiic 


do 


N. half 


12 


20 


23 


64 


Con-chai'-to Fixico 


do 


W. half 


3 


20 


23 


65 


Co-e-giis Hadjo 


do 


W. !,«lf 


11 


20 


24 


66 


Co-ge Hadjo 


Tallapoosa 


N. half 


32 


21 


24 


67 


Woc-se Micco 


Coosa 


W. half 


26 


20 


23 


68 


Yar-back-lie-ga 


Tallapoosa 


N. half 


31 


21 


24 


70 


Te-notli Hadjo 




W. half 


34 


21 


23 


75 


Sammy 


Coosa 


S. half 


5 


20 


24 


76 


Ot-tis Yoliolo 


(!o 


E. half 


9 


20 


24 


78 


Talla-dig Hadjo 


do 


\V. half 


12 


23 


20 


79 


Biliy 


do 


S. half 


IS 


20 


23 


80 


Tai'-sar-figa 


do 


N. half 


4 


20 


24 


83 


Yoliolo Cliopko 


do 


W. half 


10 


20 


24 


84 


Pars-coaf Hadjo 


do 


W. half 


9 


20 


24 


88 


Clio-\vas-te Fixico 


Tallapoosa 


S. half 


30 


21 


24 


90 


W(»c-.se Ha<ijo 


Coosa 


E. half 


21 


20 


24 


91 


TJfaula Chopko 


Tallapoosa 


W. half 


27 


21 


23 


93 


Clioc-cliar Micco 


Coosa 


N. half 


3 


20 


24 


94 


UCaula Micco 


jIo 


N. half 


7 


20 


23 


95 


Li f-tif Hadjo 


d.> 


W. hair 


15 


20 


24 


97 


MolK»ga 


do 


W. half 


8 


20 


23 


99 


Tus-ro-ner Hadjo 


do 


S. half 


10 


20 


23 


108 


Ha tul-ga Hiidjo 


Tallapoosa 


S. half 


24 


21 


24 


109 


Paster 


do 


S. half 


31 


21 


24 


112 


Co-war Sar-da 


do 


S. half 


34 


21 


24 


113 


O-wat-te-li-ga 


Coosa 


N. half 


5 


20 


24 


118 


Sin da 


do 


E. half 


1 1 


20 


24 


119 


Sim-mot-Iia-ie 


Tallapoosa 


E. half 


28 


21 


24 


122 


So-pack-ho-lo 


do 


W. half 


2>5 


21 


24 



144 



f Doc. No. 274. ] 

STATEMENT— Continued. 



Indian names. 



County. 



Ot-tis Micco 

Lot-to-ini 

Ha-des-sa 

Eufaula town. 

Ne-har Fixico 

Fick-lic-ni-ye 

Ficli-c!iork-lii-yc 

No cose Ytiliolo 

In le to-ke 

ilo-yar-ne-cliar 

Einartlilcr Tustunmccliee 

Su-i'ai'-che-ye 

Eliza 

Mar-sc-ke 

P2 nar-lio-ne-har 

Clio-te 

Sle-l>e-rlie-pe 

So\v-Sf)o-clie 

Ho-yaii-ho-ye 

Tuckabatche town. 

0-cIie Iliidjo 
No-cas ILidjo 
Icli-lios Yoliolo 
Pos-fone Einaitlilar 
Ne-ali-l'irco 
Ko-nip YolioIo 
Coo-wai-sai t Iladjo 
Si-arli Yolu)lo 
Sa-has iladjo 
Tiickabatrhe Hadjo 
Pow-wos Ilnd jo 
Tal lis-see Fixico 
Hagis Hadjo 
VN Oc-se Yoholo 
Cle-waltli-le Hadjo 
Ar-cliee le Hadjo 
Coo-sis-te Hadjo 



Tallapoosa 

do 
Coosa 



Macon 
do 
do 
do 
do 
do 
do 
do 
do 
do 
do 
do 
do 
do 
do 



do 

do 

do 

do 

do 

do 

do 
Tallapoosa 
Macon 

do 

do 

do 

do 

do 

do 

do 

do 



Location. 



w. hair 

N. Iialf 
N. hair 



N. half 
N. hall" 
W. half 
S. half 
N. half 
N. half 
S. half 
N. half 
N. half 
N. half 
S. half 
N. half 
S. half 
N. half 
S. half 



S. half 
N. half 
N. half 
half 
half 
. half 
. half 
>Vhole 
N. half 
N. half 
S. half 
N. half 
S. half 
E. hall 
S. half 
S. half 
N. half 



34 
36 
12 



6 

> 

24 

19 

8 

9 

26 

35 

14 

15 

9 

10 

10 

3 



21 
16 



21 
21 
20 



17 

17 
18 
18 
17 
17 
18 
18 
17 
17 
18 
17 
17 
17 
17 



14 
14 



13 


1 3 


12 


1 O 


3 


13 


15 


13 


34 


14 


2 


1 7 


22 


14 


28 


14 


22 


14 


21 


14 


9 


14 


33 


14 


14 


13 


11 


1 3 


3 


13 



[ Doc. No. 274. ] 

STATEMENT— Continued. 



145 





Indian name. 


County, 


Location. 


u 


u 

CS 

C 

o 


c 
.2 
o 


15 




B 
1 






a 
_o 

o 

CO 


o 
6 

34 


to 

C 

o 

H 


c 
c« 


£0 


Ho-po-ith-ley 


Macon 


W. half 


14 


24 


21 


Cho-il-Ie Hadjo 


Tallapoosa 


E. half 


27 


18 


21 


22 


Ne-ali-Ioc-co Hadjo 


do 


N. half 


22 


18 


21 


23 


HobJe 


Macon 


W. half 


33 


14 


24 


24 


Ne.he Emarthlar 


Tallapoosa 


S. half 


22 


18 


21 


25 


Haltli-le-bo-ie Emarthlar 


do 


S. half 


22 


18 


21 


26 


Tus-ke-ne-haw 


do 


E. half 


23 


18 


21 


27 


Cle chin Emarthlar 


do 


W. half 


25 


18 


21 


29 


Eclio Hadjo 


Macon 


S. half 


24 


17 


21 


30 


Loate Fixico 


do 


E. half 


17 


17 


22 


32 


Tuckabatche Yoholo 


do 


E. half 


19 


17 


22 


33 


Yo-ho-lo-c!ie 


Tallapoosa 


W. half 


14 


18 


21 


34 


Ne-har-tnat-ta Hadjo 


do 


W. half 


11 


18 


21 


35 


Cle-clium-ma-ho-lot-ta 


do 


W. half 


9 


18 


21 


36 


Ho-tul-go Yoholo 


do 


W. half 


27 


18 


21 


S7 


C!ie-ha\v Micco 


Macon 


N. half 


12 


15 


25 


39 


Co-c-gas Yoholo 


Tallapoosa 


S. hair 


10 


18 


21 


41 


0-sic Hadjo 


Coosa 


S. half 


2 


21 


18 


42 


Lu-chi Yoholo 


Macon 


S. half 


13 


13 


24 


43 


Ne- haw-lac- ca-che 


do 


S. half 


10 


13 


24 


44 


'I'o maltli Hadjo 


do 


E. half 


15 


13 


24 


45 


Mar-hai'-ie 


do 


S. half 


4 


18 


21 


46 


E-par-sart 


do 


N. half 


19 


IS 


24 


47 


Im-ma Hadjo 


do 


N.half 


12 


13 


24 


48 


Let-teg 


do 


N. half 


10 


13 


24 


50 


Co-wock-co-che 


do 


N. half 


11 


13 


24 


52 


Toot-car-has Emarthlar - 


do 


E. half 


12 


14 


22 


59 


Attos Neach-locco 


do 


S. half 


18 


14 


24 


60 


Kenarth Hadjo 


do 


S. half 


8 


15 


23 


62 


Tallis see Fixico 


Barbour 


N. half 


29 


13 


25 


63 


Tuckabatche Emarthlar - 


Macon 


E. half 


19 


15 


23 


65 


Tal-marse Hadjo 


do 


S. half 


5 


14 


24 


72 


Choc-he-a-gar 


Tallapoosa 


E. half 


7 


18 


22 


73 


Im-bo-hoat-tie 


Macon 


W. half 


34 


16 


23 


75 


Yoholo Fixico 


do 


W. half 


2 


16 


23 


80 


Fus-hatch Hadjo 


do 


E. half 


6 


16 


23 


82 


Chas-tie Fixico 


do 


E. half 


14 


16 


23 


83 


Ko-no-bie Yoholo 


do 


N. half 


13 


16 


23 


84 


O-sich-liin-ne-how 


do 


W. half 


11 


16 


22 


85 


So-ko-li-go 


do 


S. half 


17 


15 


23 


86 


Micco Yoholo 


do 


N. half 


27 


15 


23 



10 



L46 



[ Doc. No. 274. ] 

STATEMENT— Continued, 



Indian name. 



*^ 



94 
107 
113 
115 
117 
119 
120 
122 
123 
124 
132 
134 
136 
137 
144 
146 
147 
148 
149 
150 
151 
152 
154 
158 
161 
162 
163 
164 
166 
168 
169 
174 
180 
183 
187 
190 
191 
193 
197 
196 
198 



County. 



Ar-cliu-lai" 

Poe-ait-tie 

Kie-(Jio-gai 

Ko-Tio-lii-ga 

Coii-cliad Einaillilar 

Pas-koai Hadjo 

Yolioli) Hadjo 

E-tie-liai Tus-ta-nug-liadjo 

Is-tuu-la-lo-lio-ga 

Tiiii-iuo-ta 

Tolio-le-go 

Ne-liaw-niai-ta-sick Micco 

Si lio-kit-le-ga 

Ai-bo-kie 

Fus-liatch Uadjo 

E-clii'-os-ta Yoliolo 

Litti-liie 

Ti lai-lio-ie 

Waltli-lf-i-ga 
Sult-lioe-ga 

Cliu-iac lladjo 

S|)ack-toii-ci-cliu 

Ar ko-iii-ga 

Spoak-e-gie Micco 

Is-))ol-lort-die 

Yar-ruir-savv 

Clie-cliaw-nie Hadjo 

l^)-(:lii.s se 

Toat-kar lie Einaithlai- - 

Nc-liar Yoliolo 

Fo-lot-liogie 

E-i)ock-ko-lo-di-ga 

Tim-lul-lio-ga 

Clie-bi-e-liar 

Catch char Fixico 

Ho-bectii-chor 

Yiiicy 

E-maith-lo-che 

Yoholo Micco 

Siii-ne-ciie 

E-si-e-gar 



Location. 



Macon 
do 
do 
do 
do 
do 
do 
do 
do 
Coosa 
Macon 
do 
do 
do 
Coosa 
Macon 
do 
Tallapoosa 
Macon 
do 
do 
do 
do 
Coosa 
Tallaj)oosa 
Macon 
do 
Tallapoosa 
Macon 
do 
Tallapoosa 
Macon 
do 
do 
do 
do 
do 
do 
do 
do 
do 



E. half 
N. half 
E. half 
W. half 
E. half 
>Y. half 
S. half 
N. half 

N. JK.lf 

ys. half 
E. half 
E. half 
E. half 
W. half 
S. half 
N. half 
E. half 
N. half 
S. half 
N. half 
E. half 
E. hall 
S. half 
S. half 
W. half 
S. half 
W. half 
N. half 
E. half 
W. half 
E. half 
E. half 
E. half 
W. half 
NV. half 
S. half 
E. half 
W. half 
S. half 
E. half 
N. half 



10 
34 
23 
26 
26 
25 
30 
30 
22 
31 
24 
34 
28 
28 
30 
25 
11 
29 
21 
20 
24 
11 
20 
6 
7 
21 
31 
3 
3 
18 
3 
34 
7 
35 
34 
17 
4 
14 
17 
9 
6 



14 

15 

16 

15 

15 

15 

17 

17 

14 

22 

15 

14 

14 

14 

22 

15 

14 

18 

14 

14 

16 

16 

14 

21 

IS 

16 

16 

17 

16 

14 

19 

16 

15 

16 

15 

16 

15 

16 

15 

15 

14 



24 

23 

25 

23 

23 

23 

22 

22 

23 

19 

22 

23 

23 

23 

19 

24 

24 

22 

23 

23 

23 

22 

23 

19 

22 

24 

24 

21 

24 

23 

22 

24 

23 

24 

24 

23 

24 

23 

24 

23 

24 



[ Doc. No. 274. ] 

STATEMENT— Continued. 



14T 





Indian name. 


County. 


Location. 














c 






O 




.2- 




£ 

a 






C 

.2 
o 

4) 

tn 


c 
6 


"35 

c 

o 


bo 

c 


202 


So-ni-clie (or Ao-ni-che) - 


Tallapoosa 


N. half 


10 


18 


21 


204 


So-gea-})ie 


do 


E. l.all" 


14 


18 


21 


207 


Aii-ny 


do 


W. half 


6 


18 


22 


211 


Co-ie-ga 


Macon 


N. half 


22 


15 


25 


216 


Major 


Talla])oosa 


W. half 


12 


18 


21 


218 


To-gMl-car' 


Macon 


S. half 


15 


15 


24 


222 


Saw-lias-kie 


do 


S. half 


10 


15 


24 


223 


Sour Co le 


do 


N. half 


22 


18 


24 


226 


Sar-de pie 


do 


N. half 


3 


15 


24 


231 


Siisoii 


do 


E. half 


34 


16 


23 


232 


Si-ne-ino-mcach-ar 


do 


AV. half 


17 


17 


22 


234 


Sar-gin-liea 


do 


N. half 


2 


15 


24 


236 


Ho-tor-bie 


do 


S. half 


2 


15 


24 


239 


Mo-do-gie 


do 


W. half 


7 


15 


23 


240 


FuUIi-ga 


do 


E. half 


1 


15 


24 


24 1 


Tin inis-ko-kie 


do 


N. half 


12 


15 


24 


242 


Ilo-lo-di-ga 


Tallapoosa 


E. half 


3 


18 


21 


244 


Mos-lie 


do 


S. half 


5 


21 


19 


246 


Mar-lie-gar 


Macon 


S. half 


11 


15 


24 


248 


Fe-ea-clie-clice 


do 


S. half 


14 


15 


24 


249 


Hos-po-tock Hadjo 


do 


N. half 


13 


15 


24 


250 


Acclie-liotch Fixico 


do 


S. half 


13 


15 


24 


252 


SoafKi-ie 


do 


E. half 


24 


15 


24 


254 


Co-lo-gie 


do 


S. half 


23 


15 


24 


256 


Sin-nar-gof-tie 


Tallapoosa 


W. hall 


5 


18 


21 


258 


Har-dof-ko-kie 


Macon 


N. half 


36 


15 


24 


259 


Ho-ge-bic 


do 


S. half 


36 


15 


24 


263 


0-gil-lis Sen-ne-har 


do 


N. half 


1 


14 


24 


265 


Ho-par-lar Hadjo 


Coosa 


N. half 


3 


21 


19 


267 


Tuckabatclie Fixico 


Tallapoosa 


S. half 


29 


18 


22 


271 


Tim-me-li-che 


Macon 


N. half 


9 


14 


24 


273 


Micco Locco 


do 


N. half 


12 


14 


24 


274 


It-kad-die Hadjo 


do 


S. half 


12 


14 


24 


275 


Nock-ho-ie-ga 


do 


N. half 


18 


14 


24 


277 


Hu-che-thatch-clii Hadjo - 


do 


S. half 


18 


14 


24 


278 


Ful-li-ga 


do 


W. half 


17 


14 


24 


279 


Los-te Hadjo 


do 


N. half 


15 


14 


24 


281 


No-co-sie-le 


do 


N. half 


14 


14 


24 


282 


Tim mar-san 


do 


S. half 


14 


14 


24 


283 


Tus-sick-ke-char-ga 


do 


W. half 


13 


14 


24 


:287 


Me-gis-kar Hadjo 


do 


S. half 


25 


14 


24 



148 



[ Doc. No. 274. J 

STATEMENT— Continued. 





Indian name. 


County. 


Location. 






c 
o 






E 






o 
c 

u 
en 


u 
« 

s 

1 


c 
o 


V 

bo 

c 

— 


288 


Ar-liar-lock Hadjo 


Tallapoosa 


E. half 


11 


18 


21 


289 


Sie-e-ga 


Macon 


N. half 


24 


14 


24 


29S 


0-c!iis Iladjo 


do 


N. half 


8 


14 


24 


297 


Far-lieitli-lie 


do 


S. half 


26 


14 


24 


SOO 


Ar-lo-lio-kar 


do 


E. half 


27 


15 


25 


301 


Hoak-chou Hadjo 


do 


S. half 


36 


14 


24 


302 


Hea-rlic-tar-litatli-lar 


(!() 


S. half 


31 


15 


25 


307 


Clic-liar-le-bo-yar 


Tallapoosa 


W. half 


23 


18 


21 


311 


Irli-hoie 


Macon 


S. half 


2 


13 


14 


314 


Timlica-cliar 


do 


S. half 


4 


15 


24 


315 


Ar-cliccloc Eladjo 


do 


N. half 


9 


13 


24 


316 


Spatiri!)}' Fixico 


Tallapoosa 


S. half 


10 


21 


19 


317 


Tommy Yuholo 


Macon 


S. half 


9 


13 


24 


318 


Sco-mar 


Tallapoosa 


W. half 


30 


19 


22 


324 


O-soi- Fixico 


Macnn 


S. half 


6 


13 


25 


326 


Ar-ait-tto Iladjo 


Baibour 


S. half 


19 


13 


25 


327 


Ne-he E-martli-lar Yoliolo 


Macon 


N. half 


24 


13 


24 


328 


Ai-rliular Yoliolo 


do 


S. half 


24 


13 


24 


329 


U-back-lio-lat-tar 


do 


N. half 


23 


13 


24 


331 


Tallisee Hadjo 


do 


N. half 


SO 


13 


25 


333 


It-lis-liatch-le-be-yar 


Barbour 


S. half 


30 


13 


25 


335 


Is.[)o-hie 


Tallapoosa 


W. half 


1 


18 


21 


336 


Co-we-gus Hadjo 


Macon 


S. half 


25 


13 


24 


337 


Coo-sa Hadjo 


Tallapoosa 


S. half 


28 


18 


21 


338 


Micro Hadjo 


Macon 


N. half 


36 


13 


24 


339 


Tal-low-war Micco 


do 


W. half 


12 


16 


23 


340 


Sarnar 


do 


S. half 


26 


13 


24 


343 


Mcdly 


do 


S. half 


27 


13 


14 


347 


Cliowoc-co-lo Fixico 


Barbour 


N. half 


20 


13 


25 


349 


Sta loc-co 


Macon 


W. half 


17 


14 


23 


351 


Si-ir-che 


Coosa 


N. half 


9 


21 


19 


352 


Saw-liie 


Bai'bour 


S. half 


20 


13 


25 


357 


Ko nip l\i*p 


Macon 


E. half 


3 


14 


24 


360 


Li Icy 


Coosa 


W. half 


35 


21 


19 


361 


Mis-la-iia-ka 


Macon 


W. half 


6 


16 


23 


362 


Ilo-liir-tar 


do 


S. half 


32 


18 


22 


368 


Jim 


do 


S. half 


21 


13 


24 


374 


Old Tiuir.iloc 


do 


S. half 


23 


16 


23 


377 


In-tiick-lia-ie 


do 


N. half 


7 


16 


22 


383 


Tuckabatclie Emarthlar - 


do 


S. half 


2S 


13 


24 



|_ Dog. No. 274. ] 

STATE MENT— Continued. 



149 





Indian nsune. 


County. 


Location. 






c 

o 






£ 
£5 






o 
a 
.2 

o 

<i> 
en 


o 

CO 

O 

6 


'■i 

c 

o 
h 


1 




Kialigee town. 












69 


Sau-fuck-ka 


Tallapoosa 


W. half 


18 


20 


2S 


78 


Nai'-gof-fie-che 


do 


E. half 


18 


20 


22 


92 


0-sar- kin-haw 


do 


E. half 


31 


20 


2s 


101 


Osoocli Hadjo 


do 


N. half 


6 


19 


2S 


139 


0-see Yoliolo 


do 


W. half 


7 


20 


22 


158 


0-che Hadjo 

Ottissee town. 


do 


W. half 


31 


20 


22 


S 


Coosa Micco 


Macon 


N. half 


22 


16 


22 


5 


Oc-lo-har Micco 


do 


S. half 


22 


16 


22 


7 


Spoak-oak Tus-ten-nug-ga 


do 


N. half 


27 


16 


22 


10 


Co nip Yo-ho-lo 


do 


N. half 


23 


16 


21 


17 


O-saw-we Emartlilar 


do 


S. half 


36 


16 


22 


22 


Tuckabatche Hadjo 


do 


N. half 


19 


16 


23 


25 


Oe-tc-ai'che Hadjo 


do 


N. half 


30 


16 


23 


SO 


Oss-see Yokolo 


do 


N. half 


29 


16 


23 


32 


Tal-ma-chus Harjo 


do 


N. half 


28 


16 


2'? 


35 


Coo-cher Yoholo 


do 


N. half 


33 


16 


25 


40 


Micco Pi)w-ic-gar 


do 


N. half 


6 


15 


23 


58 


Yar-har Fixico 


do 


S. half 


10 


16 


23 


60 


Clie-lo-clie Yoholo 


do 


S. half 


15 


15 


23 


61 


Pas-coaf Hadjo 


do 


N. half 


11 


15 


23 


64 


Micco Yoholo 


do 


N. half 


13 


15 


23 


68 


Co-ne Hajo (or Jesse) 


do 


W.half 


34 


17 


21 


71 


Ich-che Hadjo 


do 


^V. half 


1 


15 


23 


74 


So-hoe-yar 


do 


S. half 


35 


16 


23 


83 


Tem-mul-lic-ga 


do 


S. half 


6 


15 


24 


86 


Yo-ke-che 


do 


N. half 


18 


15 


24 


89 


Ful-lo-ge-gar 

Tuskegee town. 


do 


S. half 


27 


16 


21 


11 


E-marth-lar 


do 


S. half 


11 


16 


24 


14 


Ho-tul-ga Emarthlar 


do 


N. half 


26 


IC 


24 


18 


Tal-lovv-war Hajo 


do 


N. half 


U 


16 


24 


21 


Micco Hatka 


do 


E. half 


5 


15 


24 


32 


Sin-thlannis Hajo 


do 


N. half 


12 


16 


24 


S5 


Car-war-bic 


do 


S. half 


14 


16 


24 



150 



[ Doc. No. 274. ] 

STATEMENT— Continued. 





Indian name. 


County. 


Location. 






c 
o 






tl 






O 


o 

en 






£ 






C 


o 


c 


c 


a 






o 


d 


o 


c« 


Z 








Z 


h 


« 


36 


Oach-chiim Hadjo 


Macon 


S. hair 


S3 


17 


24 


51 


Sit-tiho Elka 


do 


S. half 


25 


16 


24 


61 


Si!i-tha 


do 


N. half 


30 


16 


24 


62 


Rachel 


do 


E. half 


6 


16 


25 


63 


John Ward 

Talmachussa town. 


do 


S. half 


30 


16 


24 


4 


Hil-lubbu Tus-ten-nugga 


do 


N. half 


31 


15 


24 


5 


U-Cau-la Tus-ten-nugga - 


do 


S. half 


31 


15 


24 


6 


Hobic-jis Iliiniiugga 


do 


S. half 


24 


14 


23 


8 


Co-liase Emarthlar 


do 


N. half 


35 


17 


21 


24 


Can-chat Yoholo 


do 


N. half 


13 


14 


24 


£9 


Ke-tis-se-ne-ne-har 


do 


E. half 


25 


14 


23 


30 


Woe-see Yoliolo 


do 


N. half 


19 


14 


24 


31 


U-ba-lat-kar 


do 


S. half 


19 


14 


24 


52 


Lc-tar-ne 


do 


N. half 


SO 


14 


24 


38 


Ma- he-gar 


do 


S. half 


32 


14 


24 


40 


Te-}ar-mic 


do 


S. half 


31 


14 


24 


4.2 


Socer-ho-ko 


do 


S. half 


36 


14 


23 


43 


Me-har-kie 


do 


N. half 


25 


14 


23 


47 


Woc-se-ho-lat-tcr 

Chattoksofka town. 


do 


S. half 


26 


14 


23 


1 


I-shat-np-ho-se 


Tallapoosa 


S. half 


9 


22 


22 


2 


Ho-bo-ethle 


do 


W. half 


5 


22 


22 


3 


No-co-se Hadjo 


do 


N. half 


9 


£2 


22 


4 


Chu-ele 


do 


W.half 


3 


22 


22 


5 


Nehar locco 


do 


E. half 


4 


22 


22 


6 


Ilat-lot llar-kie 


do 


N. half 


27 


22 


24 


12 


Pil-kar 


do 


IN. half 


16 


21 


23 


17 


Sam-iio-ker 


do 


S. half 


34 


22 


24 


18 


Con-up hc-gee 


do 


N. half 


16 


22 


22 


19 


Si (uk-ho-me 


do 


E. half 


10 


21 


24 


20 


E-nc-he Emai thlar 


do 


S. half 


28 


22 


23 


22 


I-yob-lio-mo 


do 


S. half 


27 


22 


24 


23 


Iloth-lepi-ya 


do 


W. half 


35 


22 


22 


24 


K()tl»-or Voliolo 


do 


E. half 


SO 


22 


22 


25 


Fase-liatch-a Uadjo 


do 


S. half 


7 


21 


23 


27 


Choch-i-he 


do 


E. half 


31 


22 


22 



[ Doc. No. 274. ] 

STATEMENT— Continued. 



151 



£8 

30 

32 

33 

35 

36 

37 

38 

39 

40 

41 

42 

44 

45 

46 

47 

48 

49 

50 

54 

55 

58 

59 

61 

63 

64 

65 

68 

70 

71 

72 

74 

75 

80 

81 

82 

83 

88 

90 

91 

94 



Indian name. 



Yar-liar Hadjo 

Yo-ho-Io Cliop-ko 

Faseliatcli-opol-thla 

Tar-bath-le 

Ho-liil-ga Hadjo 

Fis-lal-kie 

Hol-kar-see-ga 

Tar-lit-te 

Ti-di-clie 

Micco Chop-ko 

Ar-tus Fixico 

0-ke-!in-tie 

Sa-e-mit-te 

Sholtle 

Pin Hadjo 

E-ne.har-clio-ko-ne 

Coo-sa Ernarthlar 

Yar-coo-chcc 

Sin-lio-mar-har-ke 

Kin-gat-ha 

Tus-tiin-muck Hadjo 

Tal-se Micco 

Uit-igey 

Swicli Hadjo 

Tal-niarse Hadjo 

Sal-lim-da 

Tus-tun-nuck-kee 

So-wi gie 

Cus-se-tar-opo-ethc 

Clio-ne-lar 

Tues-se-ke-ar Hadjo 

Sim-nie-ho-ga 

Yoholo Hadjo 

Swicli Ernarthlar 

Ho-tul-ke Yoholo 

Ok-ti-ar-chee Hadjo 

Si-meho-key 

Fase Hajo 

Cho-lit-tel Ernarthlar 

Is-te Ernarthlar 

Si-ko-ige 



County. 



Tallapoosa 
do 
do 
do 
do 
do 
do 
do 
do 
do 
do 
do 
do 
do 
do 
do 
do 
do 
do 
do 
do 

do 

do 

do 

do 

do 

do 

do 

do 

do 

do 

do 

do 

do 

do 

do 

do 

do 

do 

do 

do 



Location. 



E. half 
E. half 
N. half 
N. half 
E. half 
W. half 
N.half 
N. half 
W. half 
N. half 
N. half 
S. half 
N. half 
N. half 
W. half 
E. half 
W. half 
VV. half 
E. half 
W. half 
E.half 
W. half 
N. half 
W. half 
E. half 
S. half 
N. half 
S. half 
E. half 
E. hulf 
N. half 
W. half 
W. half 
W. half 
S. half 
N. half 
W. half 
E. half 
E. half 
W.half 
N. half 



5 

9 

27 

8 

5 

24 

17 

18 

SO 

8 

32 

18 

5 

13 

33 



21 
21 
22 
21 
21 
21 
21 
21 
22 
21 
22 
21 
21 
21 
22 
21 



12 


21 


3 


21 


35 


22 


23 


22 


7 


21 


6 


22 


U 


21 


31 


22 


31 


22 


14 


21 


24 


22 


8 


21 


30 


22 


25 


22 


1 


21 


15 


21 


32 


22 


18 


22 


10 


21 


10 


21 


25 


22 


35 


22 


32 


22 


4 


21 


28 


22 



152 



f Doc. No. 274. J 

STATEME NT— Continued. 






Indian name. 



Eclio-o Id-dy 

Ilar-liar Einartlilar 

Is-iiar-gof-tie 

Te-war-wi-ka 

Is-kar-ne 

Tal-of-e Hadjo 

Siiii-mar-te 

Sally 

Con-chat Fixico 

Ok-ti-arcli Emartlilar 

Ke-le 

Si-mar-kee 

Saw-lio Si-ga 

Is-kar-de 

Steem-kar-kie 

Ho-wo(»k-ko-clie Hadjo 

Fase-ltatch Emartlilar 

Su lio-lo 

Chehau town. 



County. 



Chis-so-hoie 

War-ga 

Summer 

Coosawda town. 

No-ko-sie-ka 

Ne-lior Fixico 

Ecli-has lladjo 

E-martli-le-che 

Sin-no-che 

Tal-hi-ka 

Nancy 

Sowgahatcha town. 

Ar-liar-locco Fixico 
Micco Ilajo 
TDC-co-piiii nugga 
0-ser iladjo 



Tallapoosa 

do 

do 

do 

do 

do 

do 

do 
Chambers 
Tallapoosa 

do 

do 

do 

do 

do 

do 

do 

do 



Macon 
do 
Tallapoosa 



Macon 
do 
do 
do 
do 
do 
do 



Location. 



Macon 
do 
do 
do 



E. half 

N. hall 
E. half 
W. half 
W. half 
S. half 
S. half 
N. half 
N. half 
N. half 
S. half 
E. half 
N. half 
S. half 
E. half 
S. half 
N. half 
W. half 



E. half 

S. half 
S. half 



W. half 
E. half 
W. half 
S. half 
N. half 
N. half 
E. half 



N. half 
E. half 
N. half 
W. half 



14 

7 
29 

6 
35 
28 
20 
35 

7 
14 
29 

3 
29 
20 

9 
19 
31 

3 



12 

22 
19 



18 
18 
IS 
4 
28 
34 
32 



1 

10 
6 

25 



22 
21 
22 
21 
22 
22 
22 
22 
22 
21 
22 
22 
22 
22 
21 
22 
22 
21 



17 
17 
18 



16 
16 
16 
15 
16 
16 
16 



19 
19 
19 
19 



[ Doc. No. 274. J 

STATEMENT— Continued. 



153 





Indian name. 


County. 


Location. 






c 
o 


p, 




c 

V 

1 






o 

c 

.2 

o 
<u 


^1 

en 
O 

d 


1 

c 
o 


C 


7 


It-lat-ta Hajo 


Macon 


S. half 


32 


19 


24 


10 


Sip-po-a Hajo 


do 


N. half 


15 


M8 


24 


11 


E-pos Hajo 


do 


S. half 


15 


18 


24 


12 


Coo Sar Fixico 


do 


N.half 


25 


18 


24 


15 
17 


Sap-po-ie 
Chun ne-gar 


do 
do 


S. half 
N. half 


8 
17 


19 
19 


24 
24 


£0 


Far-lio-ke-nar 


do 


S. half 


17 


19 


24 


21 


Sim-mar-hor-ga 


do 


E. half 


6 


18 


24 


23 


Mis-lio-yar 


do 


N. half 


32 


19 


24 


24 


Timmey 


do 


N. half 


15 


19 


24 


37 
39 


Sa-map-pie 
Tal-la-de-ga 


do 
do 


N. half 
S. half 


28 
28 


19 
19 


24 

24 


42 


Yarth-Iar 

Kohomatskacatchka 
town. 


do 


S. half 


18 


19 


24 


9 


Ar-chee Yoholo 


Chambers 


N. half 


24 


24 


25 


26 


Ko-ne-be Emarthlar 


do 


S. half 


7 


24 


26 


46 


Is-kar-kie 


do 


S. half 


17 


24 


26 


53 


Fus-liat-chee 


do 


N. half 


22 


24 


26 


62 


Ne-!iar-ke 


do 


S. half 


9 


24 


26 


64 
68 


Ne-liaiv|occo Hadjo 
Sinn-lio-ya 


Tallapoosa 
Chambeis 


S. half 
E. half 


SO 

28 


20 

24 


24 
26 


72 


Con-chad-do Micco 


do 


N. half 


4 


24 


25 


75 


Luke-har Hadjo 


do 


W. half 


29 


24 


26 


87 


Fic-he-le-ga 


do 


N. half 


29 


24 


25 


91 


Al-pet-ter -Hadjo 


do 


S. half 


4 


24 


26 


104 


Yar-nits-chaw 


do 


W. half 


13 


24 


26 


107 


Yoholo Micco (or Charley) 


do 


S. half 


26 


24 


25 


108 


Cus se-tar Hadjo 


do 


E. half 


29 


24 


26 


109 


Emarthlar Tustennuckee 


do 


E. half 


15 


24 


25 


117 


Ne-har Locco 


do 


W. half 


30 


24 


26 


122 


Ar-\vat-ke 


do 


N. half 


9 


24 


25 


123 


Chaw-bofe Micco 
Clew alia town. 


do 


S. half 


9 


24 


25 


3 


Sar-tar Micco 


Macon 


E. half 


3 


16 


21 


4 


U-fau-la I'usten-nugga - 


do 


W. half 


2 


16 


21 


6 


Fu.s-liatch-che Micco 


do 


N. half 


1 


16 


21 


7 


Micco Hadjo 


do 


W. half 


36 


17 


21 



154 



[ Doc. No. 274. ] 
STATEMENT— Continued. 





Indian name. 


County. 


Location. 


u 


ce 
a. 

u 
O 


c 
o 

u 
in 


15 




B 






c 
o 

o 

CO 


o 

d 


c 

o 
h 


bo 

e 


10 


Tallesee Ho-porth-ley 


Macon 


W. half 


25 


17 


21 


18 


Neliar Yoliolu 


do 


W.half 


31 


17 


22 


20 


Se-both ke 


do 


E. half 


31 


17 


22 


fi9 


Put-it-ton 


do 


N. half 


32 


17 


22 


30 


Metli-Io-no-ga 


do 


S. half 


32 


17 


22 


33 


Ho-lat-tar Emartlilar 


do 


S. half 


4 


16 


22 


34 


Clio-co-lis Hatljo 


do 


W. half 


5 


17 


21 


39 


Lar-na 


do 


N. half 


2 


16 


22 


41 


Pin Uadjo 


do 


E. half 


20 


17 


21 


42 


Chu-le Yoliolo 


do 


W. half 


I 


16 


22 


49 


Micco Hatka 


do 


S. half 


35 


17 


22 


57 


Ho-me-liie-dar 


do 


W. half 


25 


17 


22 


66 


Hilli.s Fixico 


do 


W. half 


32 


17 


23 


68 


Men-(lor-la 


do 


W. half 


29 


17 


25 


76 


Cub-brach che Emartlilar 


do 


S. half 


33 


17 


23 


77 


Fus-hatch-clie Hadjo 


do 


N. half 


27 


17 


23 


79 


So-di-sa 


do 


S. half 


27 


17 


23 


89 


Fuc-ta- bus-to Hadjo 


do 


S. half 


2 


15 


20 


91 


Tal-marse Fixico 


do 


W. half 


3 


16 


21 


95 


Tal-loaf Yoholo 


do 


N. half 


10 


16 


23 


98 


Cho-gart-ta Hadjo 


do 


N. half 


3 


16 


23 


101 


Car-bit-clie Emarthlar - 
Tallassee town. 


do 


S. half 


11 


16 


23 


10 


Woc-se Micco 


do 


E. half 


5 


17 


23 


12 


Wac-se Holatter 


do 


W. haU' 


14 


16 


25 


14 


Tock-a-sa Fixico 


do 


W. half 


6 


15 


25 


15 


Neali Najo 


do 


W. half 


26 


16 


25 


17 


Spanny Hnjo 


do 


W. half 


4 


16 


25 


18 


Coo-sis-te Hajo 


do 


E. half 


4 


16 


25 


19 


E-clio Fixico 


do 


S. half 


15 


16 


25 


20 


Micco Yoholo 


do 


S. half 


5 


16 


25 


21 


fieoige 


do 


N. half 


15 


16 


25 


23 


Echo Emarthlar 


do 


W. half 


22 


16 


25 


24 


Spauney Fixico 


do 


E. half 


14 


16 


25 


25 


Echo Hajo 


do 


E. half 


22 


16 


25 


26 


Ar-bi-ock Hadjo 


do 


N. half 


5 


16 


25 


32 


E-back-kie 


do 


E. half 


26 


16 


25 


34 


Fus-sic-ya Hatka 


do 


E. half 


1 


17 


23 


37 


Emarthlar Hadka 


do 


S. half 


24 


17 


22 



f Doc. IVo. 274. ] 
STATEMENT— Continued. 



155 





Indian name. 


County, 


Location. 




eg 
o. 








s 

s 






Li 

o 
e 

o 

V 

en 


o 

0) 
0] 

o 
6 


d. 

c 
o 


bo 

C 


38 


Coo-sis-ta Emartlilar 


Macon 


E. half 


o 

Ad 


17 


22 


41 


Nor-co-me 


do 


E. half 


6 


17 


23 


58 


Ho-|)o-ie 


do 


N. half 


27 


19 


23 


67 


Hobie Hatka 


do 


N. half 


17 


17 


23 


71 


Ech-has Fixico 


do 


W. half 


18 


17 


23 


72 


Sim-lim-mie 


do 


E. half 


19 


17 


23 


77 


No-ak-har 


do 


N. half 


21 


17 


23 


82 


Il-lin-dor 


do 


W. half 


32 


18 


24 


84 


Cle-sart-tie 


do 


E. half 


24 


17 


23 


93 


Ar-so-bo-gie 


do 


W.half 


27 


18 


23 


111 


Kin-liar 


do 


W. half 


30 


18 


23 


113 


Ho ma iloattie 


do 


N. half 


36 


16 


25 


118 


Sor-kor iio-li-ga 


do 


S. half 


19 


16 


26 


124 


Simmor-ta-ne 


do 


N. half 


27 


18 


22 


126 


Pop-luick-ker 


Tallapoosa 


N. half 


28 


18 


22 


127 


Spoke-oak Yoholo 


do 


S. half 


28 


18 


22 


128 


E-marthla Chop-ko 


Macon 


S. half 


4 


17 


23 


129 


Talmarse-loche 


do 


N. half 


1 


18 


23 


130 


Wi-gue-che 


do 


E. half 


12 


14 


25 


133 


Stim- mis-la 


do 


W. half 


5 


17 


23 


135 


Hnrk-ko-bo-yi-ga 


Tallapoosa 


E. half 


20 


18 


22 


139 


Chim-mor-poak-kie 


Macon 


W. half 


7 


18 


23 


156 


0-sou-neer 


do 


E. half 


4 


18 


23 


164 


Kinne-sor 


do 


E. half 


6 


18 


23 


165 


Ar-loc Fixico 


do 


S. half 


5 


18 


23 


166 


Ar-pitli-ke Yoliolo 


do 


S. half 


35 


16 


25 


169 


Fiis-Hatclia 


do 


E. half 


27 


18 


23 


170 


Cheille Hajo 


do 


N. half 


20 


16 


25 


171 


Tora-ma Emarthlar 


do 


N. half 


35 


15 


25 


173 


Ar-heu-locco Yoholo 


do 


W. half 


20 


19 


24 


174 


dis Haijo 


do 


W. half 


6 


17 


24 


176 


Clio-gar-ta 


do 


E. half 


6 


17 


24 


180 


Tock-co-hi-la ' - 


do 


N. half 


18 


17 


24 


184 


Sim-me-car 


do 


W. half 


1 


17 


23 


186 


Se-ho-juch-clie 


do 


S. half 


^^ 


16 


25 


187 


Cusse-ter Hajo 

Thlobthlocco town. 


do 


S. half 


19 


17 


24 


1 


Os-po-hock Micco 


do 


S. half 


5 


15 


22 


3 


Illis Hajo 


do 


W. half 


17 


16 


22 



156 



[ Doc. No. 274. ] 

STATEMENT— Continued. 





Indian name. 


County. 


Location. 












V 






o 

c 

o 

V 
CO 


o 
u 
on 

O 

6 
J5 


■•i 

c 
o 


bo 

c 

et 


4 


Cloth-thlo Hadjo 


Macon 


E. half 


19 


16 


22 


5 


Tiri-tlilanidh Hadjo 


do 


E. half 


19 


16 


22 


7 


Emarth-Io-clie 


do 


yV. half 


SO 


16 


22 


8 


0-ge-da Ydholo 


do 


W. half 


5 


15 


22 


10 


O-sooch Fixico 


do 


S. half 


9 


16 


22 


13 


No-co-se Emai'tlilar 


do 


W. half 


4 


15 


22 


15 


Purse 


do 


N. half 


9 


16 


22 


16 


Os-se Yoholo 


do 


E. half 


8 


15 


22 


19 


Wack-see-ho latter 


do 


W. half 


8 


15 


22 


21 


Tal-iiia-chus Fixico 


do 


E. half 


9 


15 


22 


22 


Emarth-lo-clie Harney - 


do 


W. half 


9 


15 


22 


23 


Fus-liatcli Yoholo 


do 


E. half 


17 


15 


22 


24 


Hoak-chum Yoholo 


do 


N. half 


28 


16 


22 


25 


Ha-tiil-ga Hadjo 


do 


N. half 


8 


15 


22 


26 


Lu-chee Yoholo 


do 


S. half 


18 


15 


22 


27 


Con-chart Hadjo 


do 


S. half 


28 


16 


22 


28 


Wat-to-lee Yoholo 


do 


E. half 


20 


15 


22 


29 


Ne-he-inar-tee-chee 


do 


W. half 


20 


15 


22 


30 


Chee-walla Uarjo 


do 


E. half 


29 


15 


22 


31 


Ne-har-locco Hadjo 


do 


W. half 


29 


15 


22 


32 


Lif-tif Hadjo 


do 


E. half 


18 


16 


22 


33 


Ronij) Hadjo 


do 


E. half 


17 


16 


22 


34 


Ar-lock Hadjo 


do 


N. half 


28 


15 


22 


35 


In-ho-malt-holth-lo-bogo - 


do 


S. half 


28 


15 


22 


36 


Tallissee Hadjo 


do 


W. half 


33 


15 


22 


37 


Tal-lo-Ia Hadjo 


do 


E. half 


33 


15 


22 


38 


Ho-j)oth-to Yoholo 


do 


W. half 


34 


15 


22 


39 


Hos-()o-tock Hadjo 


do 


W. half 


29 


16 


22 


41 


Ne-har-lock-ke Emarthlar 


do 


N. half 


27 


15 


22 


42 


Ne-har-lock-ko-che 


do 


N. half 


26 


15 


22 


44 


Ho-bie Hadjo 


do 


N. half 


23 


15 


22 


45 


Emarthlar Hadjo 


do 


S. half 


23 


15 


22 


46 


Echo Emarthlar 


do 


N. half 


22 


15 


22 


50 


Kin-hau 


do 


W. half 


11 


15 


22 


51 


Con-chart Yoholo 


do 


E. half 


2 


15 


22 


52 


O-chi-piy-se Yoholo 


do 


W. half 


14 


15 


22 


53 


Yoholo Hadjo 


do 


E. half 


14 


15 


22 


55 


Oak-F\iska Hadjo 


do 


E. half 


13 


15 


22 


57 


Pin-de-hosse Yoholo 


do 


N. half 


11 


15 


22 


58 


Ottis Yoholo 


do 


S. half 


11 


15 


22 


59 


Spoke-oak Yoholo 


do 


N. half 


10 


15 


22 



[ Doc. No. 274. ] 

STATEMENT— Continued. 



157 





Indian name. 


£ 

1 




60 


Im-me-aut-te 


62 


So-la-fi ga 


64 


Pon-ar-lioie 


67 


Oak Hill 


70 


So-dark-kie 


72 


Par-saik-kie 


73 


Tallisee Micco 


74 


Ar-clie-hatch Hajo 


75 


Oak-fus-ke Hadjo 


79 


0-sa-ne-har 


81 


So-tle-sor Hadjo 




Towarsa tovm. 


6 


Spauney Fixico 



County. 



Macon 
do 
do 
do 
do 
do 
do 
do 
do 
do 
do 



do 



Location. 



S. half 
E. half 
W. half 
E. half 
E. half 
N. half 
S. half 
S. half 
S. half 
N. half 
E. half 



N. half 



10 
3 
2 
29 
32 
33 
20 
33 
34 
15 
12 



13 



15 
15 
15 
16 
16 
16 
16 
16 
16 
16 
15 



17 



22 
22 
22 
22 
22 
22 
22 
22 
22 
22 
£2 



20 



158 [ Doc. No. 274. ] 

Washington city, January 9, 1838. 

Deau Sir: I have recently been inroimed that Messrs. Ciawfoid and 
Balch, conunisiiDiiers for investigating Iraiids in the sale of Creek reser- 
vation, &c., ai*e pi'oieeding to investigate cases of conllicting claims 
arising between James C. Watson & Co. and other individual claimants 
to lands embraced in the contract entered into at Tallassee, Alabama, on 
the 28th of Angnst, 1836, between James C. Watson & Co., and certain 
Creek chiefs. 

'JMic lirst article of the above conti-act |)rovides for the appointment of an 
agent to iii\estigate all such cases; and the pui'chasei-s iindei- it have not 
anticipated that tiiev \\owld be referred to Messrs. Crawford and Balch, 
whose ojjinions, upon at least one imjjortant branch of the cases, arc known 
to have been foi-med and expressed adverse to their claims. I have now 
to re(|uest to be infoi-med whether these gentlemen have been charged with 
the investigation and decision of the cases alluded to: and if so, respectfully 
to protest, «)n the part of James C. NN atson & Co., against such reference. 
Without intending, in the least, to imj)ngn the nioti\es, integi'ity, or ability 
of the commissioneis, Justice to pai-ties having such impoitant interests 
involved in the (juestioHs at issue i-e(juires that they should be submitted 
to an uncommitted tribunal ; and 1 have, therefore, to i-cpeat the re(|uest 
contained in a former communication for the early api)»intment of an agent 
t<) investigate the cases alluded to. 

I am, \erv respectfully, your obedient servant, 

A. IVEIISON. 

C. A. Hauris, Esq. 

Commissioner of Indian JijJ'airs. 



Washington, January 15, 1838. 
Sir: There are fifteen cases before us which were reversed by Colonel 
Hogan, and included in his leport of his investigations in iNlcHenry's 
(listiict, which have been recertified by Major Abbott. He states to me 
that he made these recertifications by virtue of written instructions to him, 
emanating Irom the aullioiity of the Secretary of War; that these instruc- 
tions were given early in the year 1836. 

These lecertilicaiions were made in cases in which the President had 
reversed former contracts, or in which the party claiming had relin(|uished 
all their interest by some instrument in w rititig. It has become necessary, 
with a view to (ieneral Watson's contract, that a copy of these instructions, 
to which Major Abbott refers, should be transmitted to this board, in an 
oflicial form. Major Abbott believes that these instructions bear date 
about the 15th January, 1836. 

Respectful I V, 

ALFRED BALCll, Commissioner. 
To C. A. Harris, Esq. 

Commissiontr, <^'C. 



House of Representatives, 

January 17, 1838. 
Sir: I daily receive letters protesting against the issuing ]>atents to the 
Watson company, under the <' large contract," as it is called, until the 



I Doc. No. 274. ] 159 

whole matter can be investigated, and the extent of the operation of that 
contract fixed by the decision of the Department. I take it for granted 
sucii patents ivill be suspended ; but as the patents are issued from the Land 
Office, out of abundant caution 1 would suggest that an understanding be 
liad, by which that office shall await the decision of tlie War Department, 
befoie ])atents sliall issue for any of the disputed tracts of land. I expect 
such an arrangement already has been made, and I should not have brought 
it to your notice but fur the great apprehensions expressed by numberless 
letters, and a report in circulation in Alabama, that the company rely 
upon procuring the patents, under their contract already approved, to dis- 
])o«sess the occu])ants in spite of any decision which may hereafter be made. 
Be pleased to enable me to relieve the settlers from such an apprehension. 
AVith great respect, vour obedient servant, 

DIXON H. LEWIS. 
Hon. Joel R. Poinsett. 



Wi\SHiNGT0X CITY, January 22, 18 38. 

Dear Sir : I have already presented the rcjjort of Captain Page, ac- 
companied with the written assent of the individual Indians to the con- 
tract entered into at I'allassee, Alabama, between General Jesup, certain 
Creek chiefs, and James C. Watson & Co., for the lands in R. W. 
McHenry's district, which formed the subject of contest before certain 
agents of the Government. 

1 have also requested the appointment of an agent to investigate such 
claims to the lands embraced in that contract as conflict with the title of 
James C. Watson & Co. under it. The appointment of such an agent 
is provided for by the contract itself, and the rights and interests of all 
parties require the speedy adjustment of the claims. When the agent is 
appointed, I presume, of course, that he will be instructed from the De- 
partment as to the character and extent of the claims which are to form 
the subject of his investigations, and which will be considered of higher 
dignity than those derived from the contract. In view of such instruc- 
tions, I beg leave to submit a few remarks, in behalf of J. C. Watson & 
Co., upon the subject of anticipated cases likely to arise between them 
and other claiuiants. 

These cases, it is believed, will consist of four classes, as follows ; 

1st. The original contract certified by the Government agents, and 
which were investigated and reported as fraudulent. 

2d. Contracts reversed by the President, and recertified. 

3d. Contracts relinquished or surrendered by the original ostensible 
purchasers, and recertified by the agents of Government. 

4th. Contracts made with the rightful owners of reservations, but not 
recertified. 

In relation to the first class, I understand the President already to have 
decided that they are to be considered ;jn?Jia/c/c?e, fraudulent and void, 
and will be set aside to the benefit of J. C. Watson & Co., unless setup 
aud supported by satisfactory evidence of their fairness dehors the record. 
This decision, I presume, will be adhered to. 

In relation to the second class, J. C. Watson & Co. are ready to 
admit, that all cases which were reversed by the President and recer- 



160 [ Doc. No. 274. ] 

tified by agents duly appointed, and agreeably to establislied regulations, 
will have |»rprc(lcncc over their title. In such cases, however, the order 
for reversal sliould clearly appear, and the regulations of the Department 
for certifying contracts should have been implicitly pursued. 

In regard to the third class, it is yielded by J. C. Watson h Co., 
that in all cases when the original purcliaser aj)peared in person before 
the Gnveriun*'nt agent, and signed a written relin(|iii;^lMnent of his con- 
tract, aflcr which a contract for the same land was recertified agreeably 
to tlie regulations, such contract will be held good. In all such cases, 
however, the written relinquisliinent should be produced or accounted for, 
and the same duly authenticated or proved according to law. 

It is contended by J. C >> atscjn bi. Co., that no contract recertified 
by the agents, except alter such relin<|uishment in wi-iting in presence of 
tlie ngeni, although marked on the agent's book us *> given up," can have 
any validity whatever. 

In respect to the foui th class, it is admitted llial all fair and bona fide 
contracts made anterior to the contract of J. C. Watson ^c Co., with 
the rightful owner of the soil, and which have never been certified ac- 
cording to the established i-egulalions, will be considered and held as 
valid only as conferring upon the contracting party the pre-emption right 
of purchase and execution, in conformity to the "regulations." in 
other words, whenever an individual can establish the fact that the right- 
ful Indian agieed to sell him his reserve, he will still have the right of 
completiiig his purchase, by paying into the hands of the agent of the 
Government the fair and full value of tlie lands as assessed by such 
agent, and having the contract certified for approval as heretofore. The 
money thus paid, and w hich must be the entiie sum or value of the land, is 
to be disposed of by tlie agent, in the manner pointed out in the contract 
of J. C. Watson & Co. 

'Ihere will ])i'obably ai ise another class of cases, in which . le righU 
and interests of J. C. Watson 6c Co. under their contract, and the 
subse(|uent acts of Captain Page, will be concerned. In the supple- 
mental instructions given to Captain Page, he was directed, in all cases 
when the Indian reservie was dead, to pay the pro rata allowance of the 
g75,000 to certain other persons in the place of the original reservee. 
In carrying out these instructions, it was impossible for Cnptain Page, 
without infinite trouble and delay, to disci'iminate between those who died 
before and those who died subso(|uent to the date of J. C. Watson & Co.'s 
contract. It appears from his report atul the accompanying papers, 
that he paid the pro rata sum allotted to each reservee, in all the dead 
cases, to the j)roper persons ; and J. C. Watson*& Co. will therefore 
have an equitable claim upon the lands of these deceased Indians. There 
may possibly exist cases in which the lands of Indians who were dead at 
the date of the Watson contract had been sold by the heirs or administra- 
tors of the deceased. In such cases, as the rightful heirs have never 
received a portion o( the >5^75,000, J. C Watson \; Co. will be entitled 
to the benefit of the previous coittracts, if any, and to the money arising 
from them when paid into the hantis of the Government agent; provided 
such sales sliall be ascertaiind to be legal and valid, and which must be 
i)roved by the purchasers before the title of J, C. Watson & Co. can be 
superseded. 

I have lespectfully to ask that, if the Department shall entertain any 



[ Doc. No. 274. ] l6l 

doubt as to the correctness of tlie views herein set forth, the same will be 
indicated to me, that I may be heard more at length before instructions are 
made out for the agent who shall he appointetl to investigate the claims. 
I am, very respectfully, &c. 

A. IVERSON. 
C. A. Harris, Esq., 

Commissioner of Indian Affairs. 



War Department, September 14, 1836. 
Sir : I have the honor to acknowledge the receipt of your letters of the 
27th, 30th, and 31st ultimo. 

In the absence of the President, I deeni it proper to forbear expressing 
an opinion upon the arrangements yo>i Iiavc sanctioned for the disposal of 
the Creek lands, and upon the gi-atuities to the chiefs. As the questions 
presented by them are of some diSRcnlty, I shall cause copies of the papers 
you have forwarded to be sent to Messrs. Crawford and Balch, to obtain 
the benefit of their opinions. Tiieir report will probably be received in 
season to aid the President in forming l»is own judgment. 

The removal of so large a number of the Creeks as stated in your let- 
ter of the 31st ultimo, is gratifying 

Very respectfully, &c. 

C. A. HARRIS, 
Acting Secretary of War. 
Brevet Maj. Gen. T. S. Jesup. 



Extract from instructions to Messrs. Thomas H. Crawford and Al- 
fred Balch, commissioners, dated September 22, 1836. 

An important step has been taken by General Jesup for the disposi- 
tion of the lands in Doctor M( Henry's district, the contracts for which 
have been contested. From a consideration of the present embarrassed 
condition of the Creeks, and a conviction of the desirableness and necessity 
of their instant removal, he has given his sanction, subject to the approval 
of the President, to a contract for the sale of these tracts. Copies of his 
letter, of the contract, and of other papers less directly connected with 
this transaction, you will find enclosed. No opinion has been exj)ressed 
by the Department upon lliis proceeding ; but General Jesup has been ad- 
vised of this reference of tlie papers to "^(m. I have to request that you 
will give them a thorough investigation, with a view to ascertain the bear- 
ing tliey have, or may liave, upon measures previously taken for the sale 
of these lands ; whether any (»!)jertions, arisifig out of the provisions of 
the laws of the State, or of the treaty \\\i\\ the Creeks, can be sustained. 
The result of this investigation you will report as early as practicable, 
for the consideration of the President. 

You will also please to procure a list of the Indians whose lands are 
embraced in this general contract. It is provided that the assent of these 
Indians shall be individually given. As, in the event of the contract being 
confirmed by the President, the duty of seeing it faithfully executed will 
devolve upon you, you will please to ascertain from General Jesup to 
what extent the Indians have assented toil; and also all other measures 
U 



162 [ Doc. No. 274. J 

taken or ordered by him in regard to it. It will be necessary to learn, 
by a comparison of the several lists, v\ hetlier any of the lands conveyed by 
this instrument are covered by contracts on the lists of those reversed or 
given up in Doctor McHenry's district ; if upon the latter list, you will 
inquire into the fact of the surrender ; and if it is not established, and no 
other objection is shown, you will notify tiie new contractors of the ex- 
istence of this first contract, and that it will be laid before the President 
for his favorable action. 

Very respectfully, &c. 

C A. HARRIS, Commissioner, 



War Department, 

O^ce Indian Affairs, September 24, 1836. 
Sir : Your letter of September 1 6th has been received. In reply, I 
have to inform you that, before its receipt, copies of General Jesup's letter, 
and of the contract made for the disposition of the contested reservations 
in Dr. McHenry's district, had been forwarded to Messrs. Crawford and 
Balch, for examination and report; and until tiiisis received, the contract 
will be subinilted to the President for his action. 

Tliese gentlemen have power to investigate cases where fraud is alleged 
to have been committed, and to take the proper measures for certifying con- 
tracts. Very respectfully, ^>". 

C. A. HARRIS, Commissioner. 
Colonel A. Iverson, 

Columbus, Georgia. 



War Department, 

Office Indian Affairs, September 29, 1836. 
Sir : In atiswer to your letter of the 12th instant, protesting against 
the approval of the contract for the sale of Creek reservations, entered 
into by General Jesup with certain individuals, I have the honor to 
inform you that the contract has not been acted on ; nor will it be until 
after the receipt of tiie views of the new commissioners, Messrs. Balch 
and Crawfoid, to whom a copy has been sent for examination and report. 
To these gentlemen a copy of your letter will be forwarded. 

\ery respectfully, &c. 

C. A. HARRIS, Commissioner. 
JuLiEN S. Devereux, Esq. 

Tuskegee, Alabama. 



War Department, 

Office Indian Affairs, October 11, 1836. 
Sir : I have received your letter of the 25th ultimo, upon the subject of 
reservations that you have purchased under the Creek treaty; and which 
will be acted upon, wlien the report of Messrs. Crawford and Balch upon 
the contract sanctioned by General Jesup is received. 

Very respectfully, kc. 

C. A. HARRIS, Commissioner, 
Col. A. Iverson, Columbus, Ga. 



[ Doc. No. 274. ] 163 

War DErARTMENT, 

Office Indian Affairs, October 11, 1836. 
Gentlemen : Herewith you will receive a copy of a letter from Mr. 
A. Iverson, connected with the contract for Creek reservations, which has 
been referred to you for examination and report. 
Very respectfully, &c. 

C. A. HARRIS, Commissioner 
Messrs. Thomas H. Crawford and 
Alfred Balch, 

Columbus, Georgia. 



War Department, 

Office Indian Jiffairs, November 9, 1836. 
Sir: Your letter of October 19th has been received ; and the course 
you have adopted, in relation to the contract for the sale of reservations, 
sanctioned by General Jesup, is approved, for ils fairness and judicious- 
ness ; precluding, it would seem, all cause of complaint. I enclose copies 
of letters received from Mr. William Dougherty and Colonel Iverson, 
upon this subject. 

Very, &c. 

C. A. HARRIS, Commissioner^ 
Messrs. T. H. Crawford, and 

Alfred Balch, Tuskegee, Alabama. 



W"ar Department, 

Office Indian Jiffairs, November 9, 1836. 
Sir : I have received your letter of the 17th ultimo, protesting against 
the contract for the sale of Creek reservations, made by the chiefs with the 
sanction of Genei-al Jesup ; and have transmitted a copy of it to Messrs. 
Crawford and Balch, the United States commissioners, at Tuskegee. 
Under instructions from this office, they have invited the parties interested 
to present written arguments or statements in relation to it ; and no deci" 
sion will be made by the President until their rej)ort is received. 

Very, &c. 

C. A. HARRIS, Commissioner^ 
William Dougherty, Esq., 

La Grange, Troup county, Georgia. 



War Department, 

Office Indian Jiffairs, November 9, 1836, 
Sir : I have received your letter of the 29th ultimo, requesting that a 
Creek reservation may be exempted from the operation of the contract 
made with General Watson and others ; a copy has been sent to the com- 
missioners, and further action will await their report. 

Very, &c. 

C. A. HARRIS, Commissioner. 
Col. A. Iverson, Columbus^ Ga. 



164 [ Doc. No. 274. J 

War Department, 

OJJlce Indian Affairs, February 10, 1837. 
Sir: In iej)ly to your note ot yestoiday, I have tlie lioiior to state, that 
the contract made by General NVatson and others, with the Creek chiefs, 
for the .sale of reservations under llie treaty of March, 1832, is now under 
consideration, in connexion with the reports of the commissioners, the 
arguments of counsel foi- the contt nding parties, and theevidcnce, that have 
been ti ansuiitted to this Dej)artnient. No definitive conclusion has been 
formed ; but it is probable the contract will be eventually conditionally 
confirmed. 

The letter of Mr. Bryan is returned. 

Vei-y respectfully, &c. 

C. A. HARRIS, 

Commissioner. 
Hon. D. H. Lewis, 

Hovse of liepresentatives. 



War Department, 

OJice Indian Affairs, February 17, 1837. 

Sir : You will receive, with this, a c(»py of the contract made between 
the United States, certain chiefs of the Creek nation, and Messrs. W atson 
and otheis ; and of a |)aper, exhibiting the considerations and conditions 
on vhich it has been aj)jiroved by tlie I'residcnt. This last paper conte(n- 
jdates the performance of certain duties by an agent to be selected by the 
President, who has directed that they shall be (levolved upon you. The 
expenses of ^executing these, it is provided, shall be borne by Messrs. 
Watson & Co. Your own conjj)onsatioii, in addition to your military pay 
and allowatices, has been fix< d by the Depat tnient, w ith the concurrence 
of these gentlemen, at ^8 00 j)er day, foi- every day necessarily engaged in 
the business. 

Your fust duty, as ]»rrsriibed in the first condition, \\ill be to obtain 
the assent of the individual Cicek reservoes interested to the terms of the 
contract. In d(tiiig this, your personal knowledge of the Creeks, aided 
by the information you may deiive from the chiefs, and others, will secure 
you against mistakes as to the identity or title of the Indians who 
present themselves as rightful claimants. And you will be careful to 
refrain from any representations that may prevent their acting freely and 
voluntaiily. 

Before undertaking this branch of tlie business, you will lereive from 
Messrs. Watson & Co. the amount of the seconti and last payment of 
$37,500 ; of whicli, and of the first payment of ^37,500, you will per- 
ceive it is the decision of the President that each leservee, justly entitled, 
sliall receive his due pi-o|)uriion. 

The mode and time in wliidi you ascertain what has been paid to each 
out of the last named sum, and what can be recovered from the chiefs, for 
distribution to the rightful claimants, and in which you will distribute the 
first named sum, will be determined by yourself. It is distinctly under- 
stood by Messrs. Watson Si Co., that they are to make good to each reser- 
vee any deficiency there may eventually be in his just proportion of the 



[ Doc. No. 274. 'J 165 

whole consideration of g75,000. You will, when the payments are com- 
pleted, render an exhibit, showing the sum each reservee was entitled to, 
and the amount paid to him ; which exhibit, with the receipts of the Indians, 
will he admitted as evidence of the sum ench is further entitled to receive. 
You will receive from this office, under this date, instructions in regard 
to the removal of the Creek warriors a- d their families. It is possible 
that this movement may be so timed as to permit your proceeding to Arkan- 
sas without any great delay. Should it, however, be otherwise, and you 
should find that, by waiting to accomjjany these emigrants, your execution 
of these duties herein confided to you will be protracted to the inconve- 
nience of Messrs. Watson and Co.* you will commit to the officers acting 
under yonr direction, the charge of the emigrants, and procetd to carry 
into effect these instructions. 

A list of tiie contested cases in McHenry's district will be forwarded 
to you as soon as it can be prepared, which I would advise you to com- 
pare and certify by the records of the commissioners at Tuskegee. 

Very respectfully, &c. 

C. A. HARRIS, 

Commissioner. 

Captain John Page, 

Superintendent Creek emigration^ 

Fort Mitchell, Alabama. 



War Department, 

Office Indian Affairs, February 17, 1837. 

Sir: I have the honor to transmit, herewith, for your information, the 
copy of a communication addressed by this ofiice to the Secretary of War, 
the recommendations in which have been approved by the President. From 
it you will learn the terms and conditions \\\wn which the contract made 
by yourself and others, on the 28th of April last, with General Jesup, for 
the purchase by your company of certain Creek reservations, has been 
approved by the President. 

I also transmit a copy of the instructions this day given to Captain 
Page, who has been directed to perform tiie duties growing out of the 
contract as confirmed, provided for in the first six of the conditions of the 

approval. 
^^ C. A. HARRIS, 

Commissioner. 

General J. C. Watson, Washington Citij. 



War Depaktment, 

Office Indian Affairs, February 17, 1837. 

Gentlemen: The President has examined with care the reports made 
by you upon the contract between the United States, certain chiefs of the 
Creek nation, and General Watson and others, together with the contract 
itself, in connexion with all the circumstances having a bearing upon it. 

I now have the honor to inform you that he has approved the contract, 



166 [ Doc. No. 274. ] 

upon conditions which are specified in the acconi])an>ing paper, marked A. 
It is desirable that your early attention should be directed to this matter, 
"with a view to llie cllcct it may have in restricting or enlarging your in- 
quiries and duties. 

Captain Page, as you will perceive from the enclosed copy of his in- 
structions, marked B, has been cliaiged with certain duties, arising out 
of the conditional ratificatiun of the contract; and I have to request that 
you will gi\ e him such information and aid as he may require. 

Mr. Wyse is now here, and copies of such papers as may appear to be 
necessary to tlie piosecution of your labors will be prepared, as early as 
possible, for transniission to you. 

Jn tlie fuither progress of yonr investigations, it is the opinion of the 
President that you should devolve the burden of proof oh the first purcha- 
ser; this will exclude, of course, all examination of cases in which a tract 
has been resold, but not recertified after reversal, and in which it may 
l)a\ e been resold and recertified w ilhout authority on the part of the agent. 

1 also enclose the draught of a bill,markt'd C, which has received a second 
reading in the Senate, and w hich does not materially difler from the pro- 
ject forwarded by Mi". IJalrh. Upon examination, in connexion with the 
ratification of the contract, it will enable you to understand all the meas- 
ures at present contemplated by the Executive in regard to this business. 

It seems to me important to adopt some course, which, while it will 
debar no one of a fair oppoitunity to jjresent his whole case to you, will 
bring tijese examinations to a close withii; a reasonable time. 

You are requested, therefore, to consider- and report whether it is not 
expedient to issue notices that no claims will be examiiied by you, unless 
applications are filed by a certain time to be fixed. 

Very, &c., 

C. A. HARRIS, 
Commissioner. 

Hon. T. H. Crawford and 
A. Balcii, Esq., 

Tuskegee, Alabama. 



War Department, 

Office India?! ^iffairs, February \1, 1837. 

Sir : I have the honor to lay before you, to be submitted to the Presi- 
dent for his a|)proval, if you think pi'oper, a contract entered into on the 
fiSth day of August, 1836. between the United States of tlie first part ; cer- 
tain chiefs of the Creek nation, of the second part; and General JamcsC. 
"Watson and others, of the third |iart ; for the sale of all the reserves, un- 
der the Creek treaty of \%5-z, in the district assigned to Doctor R. W. 
McHpnry as certifying agent: |)revious contracts for the sale of which 
had been contested, or had been certified and marked for reversal, or 
which had bocn resold and i-eccrtified without authority on the part of said 
agtnt, and for all the reserves in the Creek country which had not been 
Hold. 

In presenting this contract for approval, upon the conditions that will 
be heieinal'ter stated, it serms to be proptr to advert to the circumstances 
whidi Ird to its formation, ajid to the measures which have since been 
adopted in relation to it. 



[ Doc. No. 274. ] 16T 

When the hostilities in the Creek country commenced, the duties of the 
agents for certifying contracts for the sale of reservations were suspend- 
ed, while a large quantity of landTremained unsold, and the questions 
that had arisen in regard to contracts for the sale of a still larger portion 
remained unadjusted. The removal of the Creek Indians was dttermined 
upon; hut the objection was constantly made by them, that they had not 
disposed of their reservations. It was in this state of things that a prop- 
osition was made by the chi.^fs to Captain Page, then superintending the 
emigration, to the following effect : Tliatthe chiefs would assemble in their 
respective towns all the Indians whose lands had been wrongfully taken 
fi-om them ; and according to a proposition that had been submitted, a com- 
pany of gentlemen would pay to the true reservee, for his land, a sum sat- 
isfactory to him and the chiefs, in the presence of an agent of the United 
States ; if there should be a difference of opinion as to the price, the land 
should be appraised by two persons, selected by tlie chiefs and the compa- 
ny, and the value thus ascertained should be paid to the Indian by the lat- 
ter. This proposition was approved, with an express condition, which is 
stated in the instructions to Major General Jesup of May 19, 1836, that 
no purchase made under it would be sanctioned, if a prior valid contract 
for the same land existed. On the 30th of August, General Jesup trans- 
mitted to the Department the enclosed contract. In the letter that accom- 
panied it, he says, <' I felt much doubt as to the propriety of such an ar- 
rangement, as well as to the power of entering into it ; considering, as I 
did, that each individual Indian had a vested right in his particular loca- 
tion. Nothing short of the absolute necessity of satisfying the Indians, 
and removing from their minds the impression that tliey would receive 
nothing for tlieir lands, would have induced me, under any circumstances, 
to sanction it." This strong expression of his doubts as to the propi'ie- 
ty of the measure, indicated to tiie Department the necessity of great cau- 
tion in acting upon it. Tiie whole subject was therefore referred to 
Messrs. Crawford and Balch, commissioners on the part of the United 
States, in the Creek country, on the 22d of September, 1836, with a re- 
quest that they would give it a thorough investigation, with a view to as- 
certain the bearing the contract might have upon measures previously ta- 
ken for the sale of the lands, or whether any objection, arising out of any 
of the provisions of the laws of the State, or of the treaty with the Creeks, 
could be sustained. The reports of these gentlemen were received on the 
19th of December last. It appears that, upon receiving the instructions to 
enter upon this investigation, they gave notice to the parties interested, 
who filed with them written memorials, statements, affidavits, and argu- 
ments. Upon a full consideration of these, they submitted elaborate re- 
ports, in which they arrived ai the following conclusions : 

1. The contract is not for the benefit of the Indians, '<who, if the agree- 
ment is a good one for the vendees, must receive a much smaller sum than 
would arise from a disjjositiun of their lands and a prosecution of their 
interests in the mode heretofore ])iescribed." 

2. The contract cannot be sustained under the laws of Alabama; having 
been made without the assentof the individual reservees,and without author- 
ity on the part of the commanding general. 

3. The contract ought not to be affirmed, the money not having been 
paid in their respective proportions to the several reservees. 

I would respectfully submit some remarks upon each of these points, 



168 [ Doc. No. 274. J 

without intending to detract in the slightest degree from the credit due to 
the commissioners for the diligence and aliility \\ith whichthey have devoted 
th('n)si'lvcs (o tlie (lisciiatgo of tl;eii- (hit \ . 

1. Admitting it to be true that a hitger sum miglil have been obtained 
for these lands if they had been disposed of in "tlic mode heretofore jiie- 
scribed," it is obvious that the condition of the Indians rendered a 
further adiierence to that mode all but iniprai ticable. That mode required 
the ajjpcarance of the Indian and the purchaser in the presence of the cer- 
tilyiiig agent, and the |)a}merit of what had been nsceitained by a pievious 
apj)raiscnieiit to be a fair consideration. Could this have been done with 
so large a nuiiilicr of reservees, in a cttuntry in which hostile movements 
were in progress ? The pioposition of Ojothe Yoholo, in which this con- 
tract oiiginated, seems to me to answer this question in the negative. And 
it is not to be presunsed that the Department would have sanctioned a de- 
jiaiture from "the mode heietoTore jjrescribed," had an adherence to it 
been compatible wiih the rights of all the parties. The objection, it is also 
to be ub^u'ved, can have relerence only to the lands for which the pur- 
chasers had stijuilatcd in therontr act to i)ay $75,000 ; foi- the unsold lands 
in the described district, they aie bound to pay tlic ascertained value u])oh 
a fair aj)praisenient by disinterested pci sous. 

2. The want of auihority in Genei'al Jesjip w ill no longer be an objec- 
tion, wlun his procerdings art- aj)|)roved by the Executive; and the objec- 
tion Connded u()(in ijie non-assent of the individual reservees will be obvia- 
ted by a com])liai!ce with one of the conditions hereinafter prescribed. 

3. The money was not, it is true, j)aid to the iridi\idual reservees, but 
to the chiefs of the resj)ective towns ; to secure it, as is alleged, from pre- 
tended claimants. 

L<M)king to the circumstances of the Creek Indians at the date of this con- 
tiact, ll»>' in. porfance of their early removal, their unwillingnes to emigrate 
until their lands were finally disposed of, the advantage secured by the 
engagement of a hand of warriors for tlie service in Florida, (which was 
one (if the main inducements to its sanction by the commanditjg general,) 
and the fact that one-hall of the stipulated consideration has been advanced 
by the company, I would j-espectfully suggest that the accompanying con- 
tract be submitted for the approval of tlie President, upon the following 
conditions : 

1. That the parties of the third part shall be allowed a reasonable time, 
in the disnetion of the President, to obtain the assent of the Indians whose 
reserves are embraced in this contract, through an agent to be ap])ointed 
by the President, and in such manner as he may diiect. 

2. That in evviy case where an Indian gives his assent, he shall receive 
a rateable proportion of the whole consideration of $75,000 : to be ascer- 
tained by dividing that sum by the number of reservees entitled thereto. 

3. Tliat the parties of the third part shall be furnished with an abstract 
of the contested eases, showing the names of the Indians ; nun)ber of the 
section, townsliip, and range, to which each is entitled ; and such evidences 
of identity and other i)articulai"s as can be piocured. 

4. I'liat ilic |)arties (d" the third part shall pay the sum of $37,500, the 
second and last payment stijiulated to be made, to an agent appointed by 
the President to receive and distribute the same. 

5. I'liat elVicieDt measures shall be adoi)ted, under the direction of the 
President, to asceitain the amount each Indian entitled under this contract 



[ Doc. No. 274. J 169 

has received as his proportion of the sum of S37,500, which was advanced 
by the parties of the third part to Captain John Page, on the 29th of 
August, 1836. 

6. That whereas a receipt was given by Cajjtain John Page, United 
States agent, superintendent of the Creek emigration, on the 29th day 
of August, 1836, in the words and terms following, to wit : 

Received of James C. Watson, William Walker, Edward Hanrick, Pe- 
ter C. Harris, and John Peabody, tliirty seven thousand five hundred dol- 
lars, incomj)liance with the tliird article of a contract entered into between 
the United States and certain individuals of the Creek tribe of Indians 
holding disputed claims to reserves, which is to be retained by me until the 
assent of said people is given to said contract, and a person designated to 
receive it in their behalf. August 29, 1836. 

JOHN PAGE, 
Captain, Superintendent Creeks, 

And whereas the said sum of ^37,500, so acknowledged to have been 
received of the parties of the third part, was paid to the chiefs of the towns 
embraced in the contract, and not to the individual reservees, as stipula- 
ted in said contract, and according to the terms of the foregoing receipt, 
for reasons which, in the judgment of the agents of the Government, justi- 
fied that course ; and whereas, in the opinion of the President, it is his duty 
to secure the payment to eacli leservee his rateable proportion of the whole 
consideration of |J75,00O; it is further made a condition to the ratifica- 
tion of this contract, that the President will, in the use of all proper means, 
through an agent to be by him selected, or otherwise, cause whatever sum 
(if any) may have been retained by the chiefs out of the S37, 500, paid to 
them by the agents of the Government, or may have been distributed by 
them to persons not justly entitled to any portion thereof, to be returned 
to said agent, for distribution to the rightful claimants ; and if tlie money 
thus retained or distributed cannot be recovered, the President will rec- 
ommend to Congress, at its first session after the ascertainment of this 
fact, the appropriation of the requisite amount — not doubting that, with a 
knowledge of the circumstances of the case, the fairness of tbe contract, its 
benefit to the Indians and to the citizens of the United States, and the agen- 
cy of the officers of the Government in framing and executing it, (which, 
in his opinion, are sufficient to authorize and ensure it,) the early and fa- 
vorable action ot Congress may be had thereon. But if said appropria- 
tion shall be refused by that body, the parties of the third part w ill be re- 
quired, in order to enable the President to fulfil the obligations herein- 
before recited, to pay, within thirty days after the adjournment of the ses- 
sion of Congress to which the subject shall have been presented, whatever 
sum may eventually appear to be necessary to make good to each reservee 
his fair proportion of the whole consideration of ^75,000 ; such sum to be 
paid to an agent to be appointed by the President to receive and distribute 
the same. 

7. That inasmuch as the President has not, at present, any legal au- 
thority to give his approval to the 5th article of the contract, it is under- 
stood and agreed tliat the parties of the third part will, upon being called 
upon so to do, within a reasonable time after the 4th day of April next, 
submit anew the proposition contained in said 5th article, to wit : that all 
the lands which shall not then have been sold, including those of deceased 



170 [ Doc. No. 274. ] 

Indians, shall be taken by them at a valuation — which it is, however, agreed 
shall be made (instead of the mode prescribed in said article) by two per- 
sons appointed for that purpose, one by the President, tlie other by the 
parties of the third part ; and in case of disagreement in opinion, a third 
to be chosetj by these two persons. 

8th. The cxj)enses of carrying into effect the first six of the preceding 
conditioiH shall be defrayed by the parties of the third part. 

Very respectfully, your most obedient servant, 

C. A. HARRIS, Commissioner. 

Hon. B. F. Butler, 

Secretary of JVar ad interim. 

War Department, 

February 17, 1837. 
I recommend the contract alluded to above for approval, on the terms 
and conditions above set forth. 

B.F. BUTLER, 

Secretary of JVar ad interim. 

Approved, February 17, 1837. 

ANDREW JACKSON. 



War Department, 

Office Indian Jiffairs, February 27, 1837. 
Sir : In compliance with the request contained in your note of the 
25th instant, I have the honor to transmit, herewith, a copy of the con- 
tract made by General Jesup with Watson 6c Co., in relation to certain 
Creek Indian reservations in Alabama, and of the conditional confirma- 
tion of the same by the President. 

Very, &c. 

C. A. HARRIS, Commissioner, 
Hon. D. H. Lewis, 

House of Representatives. 



War Department, 

Office Indian Jiffairs, June 20, 1837. 

Sir : General Watson has requested and urged, througli Judge Iverson, 
now here, that you proceed forthwith to the dischai-ge of the special duty 
assigned you in relation to the further execution of the contract made 
between himself and others, and certain Creek chiefs. As much delay 
has already happened in this business, to the inconvenience and injury (as 
represented) of the contracting parties, it is very desirable that it should 
be closed as early as practicable. You will, therefore, i)roceed immedi- 
ately to the discharge of the duty assigned you ; taking care, however, 
that the proper arrangements exist for the prosecution of the business 
connected with the Creek emigration. 

Very, &c. 

C. A. HARRIS, Commissioner. 

Capt. John Page, Mobile, Ala. 



[ Doc. No. 274. ] 171 

War Department, 

Office Indian affairs, June 21, 1837. 

Gentlemen : I have received your letter of the 17th instant. In ex- 
planation of the instructions of Fehruary 17th, I have to observe, that the 
object of the contract with General Watson, to convey to him all the lands 
in McHenry's district, (the first contracts for which had been contested, 
unless the holder of the contract established its fairness and integrity,) 
as in many instances McHenry had, without authority, set aside the con- 
tract first certified by him, and certified another for the same land, it 
became necessary to direct your inquiries to the one or the other. Obvi- 
ously, the first contract was and is properly the object of investigation j 
if that was or is so successfully impeached that the President has not, or 
could not approve it, Watson's title would attach itself to the land. It 
was for this reason, and with reference to this class of cases alone, that 
the passage in the letter to you of February 17, which you have quoted, 
was written. The only modification of it necessary, is, to authorize an 
examination of contracts for any of the lands on list I, furnished you ; as 
the first contracts for these liave been set aside by the authority of 
the President. In the districts of the other agents, the first contract must 
be vacated by the proper authority, before a second w ill be subject to your 
inquiries. But to these lands Watson & Co. acquired no title under iheir 
contract ; and the result will be, that if the first contract is vacated, the 
land must be sold at public auction under the law of the last session of 
Congress, except in the cases on list L, in which the President has annulled 
the first contract, and a second |jas been properly certified by a competent 
agent ; the second, then, would be open for your investigation. 

Very, &c. 

C. A. HARRIS, Commissioner. 

Hon. T. H. Crawford and Aiered Balch, Esqs. 

Washington, D. C. 



War Department, 

Office Indian Affairs, August 2, 1837. 
Sir : General Watson has represented to this office the great import- 
ance to him of having the business connected with his contract for Creek 
reservations closed at as early a day as possible. There are also many 
public considerations making it extremely desirable that this should be 
done ; and I have to request that you will proceed to Arkansas, as soon as 
you can possibly do so with a proper regard to your other public duties. 
Captain Batman having been directed to relieve you as superintendent of 
Creek emigration, it Is hoped that there is now nothing to prevent you 
from going west without delay. Very respectfully, &c. 

C. A. HARRIS, Commissioner. 
Capt. John Vagts., Mobile, Ma. 



War Department, 

Office Indian Jiff'airs, Mgust 2, 1837. 
Sir : I have received your letter of the 4th ultimo. In answer to your 
inquiry, what course you shall take in the cases in which the Indians have 



172 [ Doc. No. 274. ] 

died since the conclusion of the contract ? I have to state, that the assent of 
the widow to the contract, or its ratification by her, will be considered as 
sufficient to authorize a payment to her, if you are satisfied of her identity 
and of her ability and disposition to expend the money profitably for the 
family of the deceased. If you are not satisfied on cither of these points, 
and the children aie adults, the money can be paid to them, upon their 
confirming the contract by their written assent. If the children are mi- 
nors, the payment may be made to the nearest relative, competent and dis- 
posed to apply the money for the benefit of the family, upon his assenting 
to the contract. Very, kc. 

C. A. HARRIS, Commissioner. 
Capt. John Page, Mobile, *3[a. 



War Department, 

Office Indian Jffuirs, September 11, 1837. 

Gentlemen : I have received your letter of the 4th instant, with the 
enclosure. 

A contract for the north half of section SI, township 21, range 22, to 
Thornton, McDougald, & Co., certified by Doctor McUenry, is before the 
commissioners, Messrs. Crawford and Balch ; and I am informed that 
evidence has been presented to them, designed to invalidate it. This will not 
be determined, however, until their repoit is made. Should this contract be 
set aside, the land would pass to General Watson & Co., by virtue of the 
contract made with them, which has been conditionally ap)>roved. The 
warranty deed under which Mr Lyle claims, gives him no title, as the 
sale has not been certified, and could not have been at any time prior to 
tlie reversal of the contract, to Thornton, McDougald, & Co. 

Very, &c. 

C. A. KARRIS, Commissioner. 

Messrs. King & Wilson, 

Washington. 



War Department, 

Office Indian Jiffairs, October 28, 1837. 

Sir : In compliance with the request of the honorable Dixon H. Lewis, 
of the 19th instant, I herewith transmit to you a cojiy of the opinion of 
honorable T. H. Ci-awford and A. Balch, Esquire, on the contract enter- 
ed into between certain Creek chiefs, and James C. Watson and others, 
for Indian reservations. Very, &c. 

C. A. HARRIS, Commissioner. 
Edward Stelle, Esq. 

Assistant Librarian of Congress. 



War Department, 

Office Indian Jffairs^ January 3, 1838. 
Sir: Your letter of the 11th ultimo to the President, and its enclosure, 
a letter from R. J. Ware, Esq., have been referred to this office. 



[ Doc. No. 274. ] 173 

Any statement or evidence which you may be able to make, or produce, 
in relation to the contract entered into by General Watson and others, 
with the Creek chiefs,for the sale of certain Indian reservations in Alabama, 
will be received with pleasure, and respectfully considered. 

Very, &c., 

C. A. HARRIS, 
Commissioner. 
Colonel J. B. HoGAN, Mobile, Jilabama. 



War Department, 

January 20, 1838. 
Sir: In reply to your letter of the 17th instant, I have the honor to in- 
form you that the attention of Ihe Department has been properly given to 
the subject of the issue of patents for the lands embraced in the contract 
with Watson and others, and that no patent will issue without the sanction 
of the Department. Very, kc. 

J. R. POINSETT, 

Secretary of War. 
Hon. Dixon H. Lewis, 

House of Representatives. 



4: 



k 



^^^ 



Deacidified using the Bookkeeper process 
Neutralizing Agent: Magnesium Oxide 
Treatment Date: ^^^ ^y 

BHKKEEPER 

PRESERVATION TECHNOLOGIES. LP. 
1 1 1 Ttxxnson Pv*- Dnv* 
Cranbtny Twp . PA 16066 
(4121779-2111 




